2003Physical TherapyRequires access

An Investigation Into the Analgesic Effects of Interferential Currents and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Experimentally Induced Ischemic Pain in Otherwise Pain-Free Volunteers

Mark I. Johnson, Ghazala Tabasam

Open publisher page 116 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Interferential currents (IFC) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) are used for pain management. This study compared the analgesic effects of IFC and TENS on experimentally induced ischemic pain in otherwise pain-free subjects using a modified version of the submaximal-effort tourniquet technique. SUBJECTS: The subjects were 30 volunteers (18 male, 12 female) without known pathology that could cause pain. Their mean age was 33.5 years (SD=9.9, range=21-54). METHOD: A single-blind, sham-controlled, parallel-group method was used. The primary outcome measure was the change in the self-report of pain intensity during 1 of 3 possible interventions: (1) IFC, (2) TENS, or (3) sham electrotherapy. The IFC and TENS were administered on the forearm, and the sham electrotherapy group received no current output via a dummy stimulator. RESULTS: A 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed that there was no change in pain intensity during treatment when all 3 groups were considered together. Further analysis revealed that IFC reduced pain intensity when compared with sham electrotherapy but not when compared only with TENS. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: There were no differences in the magnitude of analgesia between IFC and TENS. Interferential currents reduced pain intensity to a greater extent than sham electrotherapy.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Interferential currents (IFC) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) are used for pain management. This study compared the analgesic effects of IFC and TENS on experimentally induced ischemic pain in otherwise pain-free subjects using a modified version of the submaximal-effort tourniquet technique. SUBJECTS: The subjects were 30 volunteers (18 male, 12 female) without known pathology that could cause pain. Their mean age was 33.5 years (SD=9.9, range=21-54). METHOD: A single-blind, sham-controlled, parallel-group method was used. The primary outcome measure was the change in the self-report of pain intensity during 1 of 3 possible interventions: (1) IFC, (2) TENS, or (3) sham electrotherapy. The IFC and TENS were administered on the forearm, and the sham electrotherapy group received no current output via a dummy stimulator. RESULTS: A 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed that there was no change in pain intensity during treatment when all 3 groups were considered together. Further analysis revealed that IFC reduced pain intensity when compared with sham electrotherapy but not when compared only with TENS. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: There were no differences in the magnitude of analgesia between IFC and TENS. Interferential currents reduced pain intensity to a greater extent than sham electrotherapy.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 116 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Interferential currents (IFC) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) are used for pain management. This study compared the analgesic effects of IFC and TENS on experimentally induced ischemic pain in otherwise pain-free subjects using a modified version of the submaximal-effort tourniquet technique. SUBJECTS: The subjects were 30 volunteers (18 male, 12 female) without known pathology that could cause pain. Their mean age was 33.5 years (SD=9.9, range=21-54). METHOD: A single-blind, sham-controlled, parallel-group method was used. The primary outcome measure was the change in the self-report of pain intensity during 1 of 3 possible interventions: (1) IFC, (2) TENS, or (3) sham electrotherapy. The IFC and TENS were administered on the forearm, and the sham electrotherapy group received no current output via a dummy stimulator. RESULTS: A 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance revealed that there was no change in pain intensity during treatment when all 3 groups were considered together. Further analysis revealed that IFC reduced pain intensity when compared with sham electrotherapy but not when compared only with TENS. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: There were no differences in the magnitude of analgesia between IFC and TENS. Interferential currents reduced pain intensity to a greater extent than sham electrotherapy.

Key concepts: Electrotherapy, Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, Medicine, Anesthesia, Analgesic, Physical therapy, Forearm, Stimulation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
An Investigation Into the Analgesic Effects of Interferential Currents and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Experimentally Induced Ischemic Pain in Otherwise Pain-Free Volunteers — Research Paper | ScholarLens