Efficacy Of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation Research Articles

Opioid-Sparing Strategies in Arthroscopic Surgery

Background: Opioid overprescription is a problem in orthopaedic surgery. Arthroscopic surgery, given its minimally invasive nature, represents an opportunity to minimize opioid prescription and consumption by using effective pain management adjuncts. Thus, the primary question posed in this study was which noninvasive pain management modalities can effectively manage pain and reduce opioid intake after arthroscopic surgery. Methods: The databases PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched on August 10, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating noninvasive pain management strategies in arthroscopy patients were evaluated. Eligible studies were selected through a systematic screening process. Meta-analysis was performed for pain scores and opioid consumption at time points which had sufficient data available. Results: Twenty-one RCTs were included, with a total of 2,148 patients undergoing shoulder, knee, and hip arthroscopy. Meta-analysis comparing nonopioid, oral analgesic regimens, with or without patient education components, with the standard of care or placebo demonstrated no difference in pain scores at 24 hours, 4 to 7 days, or 14 days postoperatively. Nonopioid regimens also resulted in significantly lower opioid consumption in the first 24 hours postoperatively (mean difference, −37.02 mg oral morphine equivalents, 95% confidence interval, −74.01 to −0.03). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), cryotherapy, and zolpidem were also found to effectively manage pain and reduce opioid use in a limited number of studies. Conclusions: A range of noninvasive pain management strategies exist to manage pain and reduce opioid use after arthroscopic procedures. The strongest evidence base supports the use of multimodal nonopioid oral analgesics, with some studies incorporating patient education components. Some evidence supports the efficacy of TENS, cryotherapy, and nonbenzodiazepine sleeping aids. Direction from governing bodies is an important next step to incorporate these adjuncts into routine clinical practice to manage pain and reduce the amount of opioids prescribed and consumed after arthroscopic surgery. Level of Evidence: Level II, systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of the levels of evidence.

Using TENS for Pain Control: Update on the State of the Evidence.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a non-pharmacological intervention used in the treatment of acute and chronic pain conditions. The first clinical studies on TENS were published over 50 years ago, when effective parameters of stimulation were unclear and clinical trial design was in its infancy. Over the last two decades, a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying TENS efficacy has led to the development of an adequate dose and has improved outcome measure utilization. The continued uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of TENS to alleviate pain, despite years of research, is related to the quality of the clinical trials included in systematic reviews. This summary of the evidence includes only trials with pain as the primary outcome. The outcomes will be rated as positive (+), negative (−), undecided (U), or equivalent to other effective interventions (=). In comparison with our 2014 review, there appears to be improvement in adverse events and parameter reporting. Importantly, stimulation intensity has been documented as critical to therapeutic success. Examinations of the outcomes beyond resting pain, analgesic tolerance, and identification of TENS responders remain less studied areas of research. This literature review supports the conclusion that TENS may have efficacy for a variety of acute and chronic pain conditions, although the magnitude of the effect remains uncertain due to the low quality of existing literature. In order to provide information to individuals with pain and to clinicians treating those with pain, we suggest that resources for research should target larger, high-quality clinical trials including an adequate TENS dose and adequate timing of the outcome and should monitor risks of bias. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses should focus only on areas with sufficiently strong clinical trials that will result in adequate sample size.

Effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on the level of interleukin “6” and “10” post pleurodesis

Objectives: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) has been used to control post-pleurodesis pain with contradiction results. We aimed to assess the efficacy of TENS on post- pleurodesis pain in relation to: (i) Interleukin 6; (ii) Interleukin 10; (iii) pain. Methods: Between September 2020 to October 2021, 68 patients underwent pleurodesis post posterolateral thoracotomy. Sixty patients were enrolled in the present study and randomized in two groups: Group A TENS group (30 patients) who received postoperatively TENS for 2 days and Group B placebo group (30 patients) without TENS. In both groups (i) serum cytokines (IL-6, IL-10) were measured by ELISA before surgery and at 1, 6, 12, 24 and 48 postoperative hours (POHs); (ii) at the same POHs, the pain score was measured using critical care pain observational tool (CPOT). Repeated measures of analysis of variance assess the difference between two study groups. A value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: In the current study, a total of 60 patients participated and they were randomly distributed into 2 groups (30 patients/group). Statistical analysis shown that there was a significant change of pre-post treatment at groups A, (p<0.05).

Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Rodent Models of Neuropathic Pain: A Meta-Analysis.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a non-invasive therapeutic intervention that is typically used for many years to treat chronic pain in patients who are refractory to pain medications. However, evidence of the efficacy of TENS treatment for neuropathic pain is lacking in humans. To further understand the efficacy of TENS under various intervention conditions and illuminate the current circumstance and future research directions, we systematically reviewed animal studies investigating the efficacy of TENS in relieving pain in neuropathic pain rodent models. We searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE (via PubMed), and Web of Science and identified 11 studies. Two meta-analyses were performed. The first meta-analysis showed that a single TENS treatment was capable of temporarily ameliorating neuropathic pain when compared to control groups with a significant effect (standardized mean difference: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.65, 2.42; p = 0.0007; I2 = 58%). Significant temporary alleviation in neuropathic pain intensity was also observed in the meta-analysis of repetitive TENS (standardized mean difference: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.31, 1.40; p = 0.002; I2 = 75%). Subgroup analysis showed no effect of the timing of the application of TENS (test for subgroup difference, p = 0.47). Leave-one-out sensitivity analyses suggested that no single study had an outsized effect on the pooled estimates, which may partly prove the robustness of these findings. Other stratified analyses were prevented by the insufficient number of included studies. Overall, current data suggest that TENS might be a promising therapy to ameliorate neuropathic pain. However, the high risk of bias in the included studies suggests that cautions must be considered when interpreting these findings and it is not reasonable to directly generalize the results obtained from animal studies to clinical practice. Future studies should pay more attention to improving the quality of study design and reporting, thereby facilitating the understanding of mechanisms underlying TENS treatment, reducing more potentially unsuccessful clinical trials, and optimizing the efficacy of TENS for people with neuropathic pain.

Does TENS Reduce the Intensity of Acute and Chronic Pain? A Comprehensive Appraisal of the Characteristics and Outcomes of 169 Reviews and 49 Meta-Analyses.

Background and Objectives: Uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) to alleviate pain spans half a century. There has been no attempt to synthesise the entire body of systematic review evidence. The aim of this comprehensive review was to critically appraise the characteristics and outcomes of systematic reviews evaluating the clinical efficacy of TENS for any type of acute and chronic pain in adults. Materials and Methods: We searched electronic databases for full reports of systematic reviews of studies, overviews of systematic reviews, and hybrid reviews that evaluated the efficacy of TENS for any type of clinical pain in adults. We screened reports against eligibility criteria and extracted data related to the characteristics and outcomes of the review, including effect size estimates. We conducted a descriptive analysis of extracted data. Results: We included 169 reviews consisting of eight overviews, seven hybrid reviews and 154 systematic reviews with 49 meta-analyses. A tally of authors’ conclusions found a tendency toward benefits from TENS in 69/169 reviews, no benefits in 13/169 reviews, and inconclusive evidence in 87/169 reviews. Only three meta-analyses pooled sufficient data to have confidence in the effect size estimate (i.e., pooled analysis of >500 events). Lower pain intensity was found during TENS compared with control for chronic musculoskeletal pain and labour pain, and lower analgesic consumption was found post-surgery during TENS. The appraisal revealed repeated shortcomings in RCTs that have hindered confident judgements about efficacy, resulting in stagnation of evidence. Conclusions: Our appraisal reveals examples of meta-analyses with ‘sufficient data’ demonstrating benefit. There were no examples of meta-analyses with ‘sufficient data’ demonstrating no benefit. Therefore, we recommend that TENS should be considered as a treatment option. The considerable quantity of reviews with ‘insufficient data’ and meaningless findings have clouded the issue of efficacy. We offer solutions to these issues going forward.

Resolving Long-Standing Uncertainty about the Clinical Efficacy of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) to Relieve Pain: A Comprehensive Review of Factors Influencing Outcome.

Pain is managed using a biopsychosocial approach and pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a technique whereby pulsed electrical currents are administered through the intact surface of the skin with the intention of alleviating pain, akin to ‘electrically rubbing pain away’. Despite over 50 years of published research, uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of TENS remains. The purpose of this comprehensive review is to critically appraise clinical research on TENS to inform future strategies to resolve the ‘efficacy-impasse’. The principles and practices of TENS are described to provide context for readers unfamiliar with TENS treatment. The findings of systematic reviews evaluating TENS are described from a historical perspective to provide context for a critical evaluation of factors influencing the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs); including sample populations, outcome measures, TENS techniques, and comparator interventions. Three possibilities are offered to resolve the impasse. Firstly, to conduct large multi-centered RCTs using an enriched enrolment with randomized withdrawal design, that incorporates a ‘run-in phase’ to screen for potential TENS responders and to optimise TENS treatment according to individual need. Secondly, to meta-analyze published RCT data, irrespective of type of pain, to determine whether TENS reduces the intensity of pain during stimulation, and to include a detailed assessment of levels of certainty and precision. Thirdly, to concede that it may be impossible to determine efficacy due to insurmountable methodological, logistical and financial challenges. The consequences to clinicians, policy makers and funders of this third scenario are discussed. I argue that patients will continue to use TENS irrespective of the views of clinicians, policy makers, funders or guideline panel recommendations, because TENS is readily available without prescription; TENS generates a pleasant sensory experience that is similar to easing pain using warming and cooling techniques; and technological developments such as smart wearable TENS devices will improve usability in the future. Thus, research is needed on how best to integrate TENS into existing pain management strategies by analyzing data of TENS usage by expert-patients in real-world settings.

Efficacy of TENS in Cervical Pain Syndromes: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews

Neck pain is defined as perceived pain, originating in an area bounded above by the nuchal line, below by an imaginary line passing through the spinous process of T1 and laterally by the sagittal plane tangent to the lateral edges of the neck. Our purpose is to investigate the effectiveness of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in patients suffering from both acute and chronic cervical pain syndromes. The literature research was conducted by consulting the following databases: PubMed, PEDro, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. To formulate the scientific question correctly, the PICO model was used. This umbrella review includes all systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis, in English, which analyze the use of TENS in subjects suffering from acute or chronic cervical pain. To evaluate the methodological quality of the studies, the AMSTAR model. A total of eleven systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses were included. The results of the study show how TENS seems to have an effect in reducing the intensity of acute and chronic cervical pain, especially in the short term. However, it was not possible to provide precise recommendations in this regard. Based on our result, it is desirable to carry out further studies that support the effectiveness of using TENS in patients suffering from acute and chronic neck pain.

Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on rats with post-operative ileus.

Post-operative ileus (POI) is a type of bowel dismotility causing accumulation of gas and fluid. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) has been frequently used for medical applications such as pain treatment and nervous stimulation. In this experimental animal model of POI, our aim is to investigate the effects of TENS on POI, and to demonstrate histopathological changes in rat intestine after TENS application. The present study is an experimental animal model of POI. Sixteen Wistar-Albino male rats in two groups were used and laparotomy was performed. After colorectum and small intestine were manipulated, activated charcoal and Nile red were ad-ministered by oral gavage. Electrodes were placed to the abdomen skin of the rats and TENS method was used. Rats in two groups were sacrificed on 24 h. The esophagus, stomach, and all intestines of the rats were resected and a direct X-ray and computerized tomography scan, and 'J' images were taken, and the progression of active coals was measured radiologically. Histopathological and microscopic evaluation was performed. The median of activated charcoal measure was 429 mm (178-594) in TENS group, 203 mm (149-313) in the control group, respectively, and these were statistically significant (p=0.004963). There was a significant difference between the two groups in terms of histopathological necrosis (p=0.041). In addition, the amount of Nil Red (550 nm) in the GI track is increased after 8 h of gavage with sequential applications of TENS. This study demonstrated the protective and therapeutic efficacy of TENS in POI in a rat model by radiologically and histopathologically. In clinical practice, TENS may be examined on POI. Further studies are warranted to validate and generalize our findings, and to assess the impact of TENS for post-operative pain also.

Patient-Administered Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for Postoperative Pain Control After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Feasibility Trial

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a noninvasive analgesic neurostimulation modality. Difficulties in clinical trial blinding and therapy administration have limited conclusions of previous trials. The aims of this study were to first investigate the feasibility and acceptability of patient-administered TENS after surgery, and second, the feasibility of using sub-sensory TENS as a proxy sham group for patient-blinding. Over a four-month period, patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy at a single center were randomized to receive maximally tolerable high-intensity (HI) TENS or sub-sensory low-intensity (LI) TENS. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded. Primary outcomes were the feasibility, tolerability, and acceptability of patient self-administered TENS, measured by patient-reported outcomes, and the strength of patient-blinding, measured using the James Blinding Index (JBI). Secondary outcomes explored clinical recovery and analgesic efficacy. Nineteen patients were screened for inclusion; ten patients were randomized and completed the feasibility study. TENS therapy was variably utilized (median duration of TENS 5.3 hours/day [IQR: 4.1-6.9]). The JBI was 0.7, indicating a strong strength of blinding. Majority of patients found the TENS unit easy to use (90%) and were confident with self-administration (100%). No patients experienced adverse effects of TENS use. Patient-administered TENS is safe and acceptable. Future studies may use sub-sensory TENS as a proxy sham control to more reliably blind patients. A larger, double-blinded RCT employing these techniques is now needed to determine the analgesic efficacy of TENS in an enhanced recovery setting, and its potential to reduce opiate usage.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain management in sickle cell disease.

Sickle cell disease (SCD), one of the most common inherited disorders, is associated with vaso-occlusive pain episodes and haemolysis leading to recurrent morbidity, hospital admissions and work or school absenteeism. The crises are conventionally treated with opioids, non-opioids and other adjuvants with the risk of developing complications, addictions and drug-seeking behaviour. Different non-pharmacological treatments, such as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) have been used for managing pain in other painful conditions. Hence, the efficacy of TENS for managing pain in SCD needs to be reviewed. To assess the benefits and harms of TENS for managing pain in people with SCD who experience pain crises or chronic pain (or both). We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Haemoglobinopathies Register, comprising of references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched online trial registries and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Date of the last search: 26 Febraury 2020. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs, where TENS was evaluated for managing pain in people with SCD. Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of the trials identified by the literature searches according to the inclusion criteria. Two review authors then independently extracted data, assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane standard tool and rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE guidelines. One double-blind cross-over RCT with 22 participants with SCD (aged 12 to 27 years) was eligible for inclusion. Following stratification into four pain crises severity grades, participants were then randomised to receive TENS or placebo (sham TENS). The trial was concluded after 60 treatment episodes (30 treatment episodes of each treatment group). There is a lack of clarity regarding the trial design and the analysis of the cross-over data. If a participant was allocated to TENS treatment for an episode of pain and subsequently returned with a further episode of a similar degree of pain, they would then receive the sham TENS treatment (cross-over design). For those experiencing a pain episode of a different severity, it is not clear whether they were re-randomised or given the alternate treatment. Reporting and analysis was based on the total number pain events and not on the number of participants. It is unclear how many participants were crossed over from the TENS group to the sham TENS group and vice versa. The trial had a high risk of bias regarding random sequence generation and allocation concealment; an unclear risk regarding the blinding of participants and personnel; and a low risk regarding the blinding of the outcome assessors and selective outcome reporting. The trial was small and of very low quality; furthermore, given the issue with trial design we were unable to quantitatively analyse the data. Therefore, we present only a narrative summary and caution is advised in interpreting the results. In relation to our pre-defined primary outcomes, the included trial did not report pain relief at two to four weeks post intervention. The trial authors reported that no difference was found in the changes in pain ratings (recorded at one hour and four hours post intervention) between the TENS and the placebo groups. In relation to our secondary outcomes, the analgesic usage during the trial also did not show any difference between groups. Given the quality of the evidence, we are uncertain whether TENS improves overall satisfaction as compared to sham TENS. The ability to cope with activities of daily living was not evaluated. Regarding adverse events, although one case of itching was reported in the TENS group, the site and nature of itching was not clearly stated; hence it cannot be clearly attributed to TENS. Also, two participants receiving 'sham' TENS reported a worsening of pain with the intervention. Since we have only included one small and very low-quality trial, with a high risk of bias across several domains, we are unable to conclude whether TENS is harmful or beneficial for managing pain in people with SCD. There is a need for a well-designed, adequately-powered, RCT to evaluate the role of TENS in managing pain in people with SCD.

Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Relieving Neuropathic Pain: Basic Mechanisms and Clinical Applications.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is widely used as a non-pharmacological approach for pain relief in a variety of clinical conditions. This manuscript aimed to review the basic mechanisms and clinical applications regarding the use of TENS for alleviating the peripheral (PNP) and central neuropathic pain (CNP). Basic studies on animal models showed that TENS could alleviate pain by modulating neurotransmitters and receptors in the stimulation site and its upper levels, including the spinal cord, brainstem, and brain. Besides, many clinical studies have investigated the efficacy of TENS in patients with CNP (caused by spinal cord injury, stroke, or multiple sclerosis) and PNP (induced by diabetes, cancer, or herpes zoster). Most clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of TENS in attenuating neuropathic pain and suggested that appropriate stimulation parameters (e.g., stimulation frequency and intensity) were critical to improving the analgesic effects of TENS. However, there are some conflicting findings related to the efficacy of TENS in relieving neuropathic pain. With optimized stimulation parameters, TENS would be effective in attenuating neuropathic pain. To obtain sufficient evidence to support the use of TENS in the clinic, researchers recommended performing multicenter clinical trials with optimized TENS protocols for the treatment of various CNP and PNP.

Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation Reduces Resting Pain in Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Randomized and Placebo-Controlled Double-Blind Pilot Study.

Individuals receiving radiation for head and neck cancer (HNC) often develop painful oral mucositis that impairs function, possibly leading to feeding tubes, hospitalization, and treatment delays. Although pharmacologic medications provide some relief, many report inadequate analgesia and adverse effects. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a safe, nonpharmacologic intervention; it decreases pain and analgesics and improves function, yet no studies examined TENS for HNC. The aim of this study was to examine the efficacy of TENS for pain and function in HNC patients. This study used a randomized, double-blinded crossover design; participants received 3 TENS treatments during weeks 4 to 6 of radiation: active, placebo, and no TENS over the temporomandibular joint and upper cervical region. Pain (McGill Pain Questionnaire, visual analog scale [VAS] resting and function), function (mouth opening, tongue movement, speaking), fatigue (VAS), and treatment effectiveness (VAS) were assessed before and after TENS at 3 visits. Resting pain (McGill Pain Questionnaire and VAS) decreased significantly more after active TENS than placebo or no TENS; changes in function and pain with function did not differ between conditions. Active TENS decreased fatigue significantly more than no TENS and was rated as more effective than placebo TENS. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation improves pain in HNC patients receiving radiation but not function or pain with function relative to placebo or no TENS. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation may be a viable tool for radiation-induced HNC pain to complement pharmacologic approaches. This nonpharmacologic intervention could decrease the debilitating effects of radiation and analgesics, and improve quality of life. Clinical trials should examine the effects and safety of repeated, daily TENS in HNC patients receiving radiation.

Neurobiological mechanisms of TENS-induced analgesia

Pain inhibition by additional somatosensory input is the rationale for the widespread use of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) to relieve pain. Two main types of TENS produce analgesia in animal models: high-frequency (∼50–100 Hz) and low-intensity ‘conventional’ TENS, and low-frequency (∼2–4 Hz) and high-intensity ‘acupuncture-like’ TENS. However, TENS efficacy in human participants is debated, raising the question of whether the analgesic mechanisms identified in animal models are valid in humans. Here, we used a sham-controlled experimental design to clarify the efficacy and the neurobiological effects of ‘conventional’ and ‘acupuncture-like’ TENS in 80 human volunteers. To test the analgesic effect of TENS we recorded the perceptual and brain responses elicited by radiant heat laser pulses that activate selectively Aδ and C cutaneous nociceptors. To test whether TENS has a long-lasting effect on brain state we recorded spontaneous electrocortical oscillations. The analgesic effect of ‘conventional’ TENS was maximal when nociceptive stimuli were delivered homotopically, to the same hand that received the TENS. In contrast, ‘acupuncture-like’ TENS produced a spatially-diffuse analgesic effect, coupled with long-lasting changes both in the state of the primary sensorimotor cortex (S1/M1) and in the functional connectivity between S1/M1 and the medial prefrontal cortex, a core region in the descending pain inhibitory system. These results demonstrate that ‘conventional’ and ‘acupuncture-like’ TENS have different analgesic effects, which are mediated by different neurobiological mechanisms.

Randomized study of the impact of a therapeutic education program on patients suffering from chronic low-back pain who are treated with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is often used for the treatment of low-back pain (LBP). However, its effectiveness is controversial. To determine the efficacy of TENS in the treatment LBP when associated to a therapeutic education program (TEP). Open randomized monocentric study. University hospital between 2010 and 2014. A total of 97 patients suffering from LBP. Routine care (TENS group) or routine care plus a therapeutic education program (TENS-TEP group) based on consultation support by a pain resource nurse. EIFEL and Dallas Pain Questionnaire scores. Twenty-two patients (44%) were still assessable at the end-of-study visit, whereas 33 (70%) were assessable at the same time point in the TENS-TEP group (P = .013). The EIFEL score and the Dallas score had a similar evolution over time between groups (P = .18 and P = .50 respectively). Similarly, there were no significant differences between the groups with respect to resting pain scores (P = .94 for back pain and P = .16 for leg pain) and movement pain scores (P = .52 for back pain and P = .56 for leg pain). At Month 6, there was no significant difference between the groups (P = .85) with regard to analgesics and social impact. Two patients presented a serious adverse event during the study (one in each group) but non-attributable to the treatment studied. This study does not support the use of TENS in the treatment of patients with chronic LBP even though patients benefited from a therapeutic education program by a pain resource nurse. However, the higher number of premature withdrawals in the TENS group may be due to early withdrawal of patients who did not experience improvement of their symptoms.

Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Treating Chronic Back Pain.

This study is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) to a control and to other nerve stimulation therapies (NSTs) for the treatment of chronic back pain. Citations were identified in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov through June 2014 using the following keywords: nerve stimulation therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, back pain, chronic pain. Control treatments included sham, placebo, or medication only. Other NSTs included electroacupuncture, percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and percutaneous neuromodulation therapy. Twelve randomized controlled trials including 700 patients were included in the analysis. The efficacy of TENS was similar to that of control treatment for providing pain relief (standardized difference in means [SDM] = -0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.58 to 0.18; P = 0.293). Other types of NSTs were more effective than TENS in providing pain relief (SDM = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.15-1.57; P = 0.017). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation was more effective than control treatment in improving functional disability only in patients with follow-up of less than 6 weeks (SDM = -1.24; 95% CI, -1.83 to -0.65; P < 0.001). There was no difference in functional disability outcomes between TENS and other NSTs. These results suggest that TENS does not improve symptoms of lower back pain, but may offer short-term improvement of functional disability.

Comparison of Analgesic Effect of Piroxicam and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation Therapy on Pain associated with Orthodontic Separator Placement: A Single Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Aims and objectives: To assess and compare the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) therapy and preemptive piroxicam administration in reducing the severity of pain after orthodontic separator placement. Materials and methods: It was a randomized, single-blind, parallel arm trial. Subjects of either gender between 18 and 30 years of age, scheduled to undergo regular orthodontic therapy with placement of two separators in each arch, were selected for this trial. The sample size consisted of 60 patients from whom prior informed consent was obtained. They were assigned randomly into two categories of 30 subjects each. • Group I: Subjects were given piroxicam (20 mg) 1 hour before separator placement. • Group II: Subjects were given TENS therapy immediately after separator placement. The treatment was administered by the coinvestigator, so as to blind the principal investigator to the treatment group. Perceived pain was evaluated on chewing and fitting back teeth together at 2-, 6-, 24-, and 48-hour intervals, using the visual analog scale (VAS). Results: Descriptive statistical analysis revealed that the VAS scores in the piroxicam group were marginally higher than the TENS group at all intervals, except at 2 hours. The difference was, however, statistically insignificant. Conclusion: The findings of this single blind randomized, controlled trial (RCT) suggest that TENS therapy is as effective as 20 mg piroxicam administered preemptively, in controlling pain felt due to separator placement. The TENS offers several advantages over piroxicam, as it is devoid of the inherent side effects of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) like an inhibitory effect on orthodontic tooth movement and also gastric irritation. Therefore, the use of TENS is recommended over NSAIDs for the successful management of orthodontic pain, which is so critical both from the patient’s and from the clinician’s perspective.

Transcutaneous nerve stimulation for pain relief during chest tube removal following cardiac surgery.

Background and Aims:In patients undergoing open heart surgery, chest tubes are removed postoperatively when patients are well awake and stable. Pain during chest tube removal can be moderate to severe and can be the worst experience of hospitalization. Various modalities of pain relief during chest tube removal have been tried with variable results. We sought to examine the effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) as an intervention for pain relief during chest tube removal after cardiac surgery.Material and Methods:In a tertiary care center, fifty patients undergoing open heart surgery were randomized into two groups. Group TENS (n = 25) received TENS from 30 min before and continued up to 30 min after chest tube removal. Control Group (n = 25) did not receive TENS. In both the groups, additional analgesic medication was provided on demand, besides the standard analgesic regime which was injection ketorolac 30 mg intramuscularly every 8 h. Patients were studied for pain during chest drain removal and pain related nausea, vomiting, and sense of well-being.Results:Mean visual analog pain score assessed for chest tube removal was significantly less 4.1 ± 1.2 (P < 0.05) in TENS Group as compared to 6.1 ± 0.8 in Control Group. Significantly greater number of patients (n = 14) (P < 0.05) in Control Group demanded additional analgesia as compared to TENS Group (n = 5). Feeling of well-being, improvement in appetite, and sleep was better in TENS Group as compared to Control Group.Conclusion:We conclude that TENS might not replace the conventional analgesics but has definite adjuvant role in decreasing pain scores and improves sense of well-being during chest tube removal after cardiac surgery.

An Enhanced Method of Transcutaneously Stimulating the Tibial Nerve for the Treatment of Overactive Bladder.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) can be used to electrically stimulate the tibial nerve for the purpose of treating overactive bladder. Although clinical benefits can be achieved, the overall therapeutic efficacy of TENS is limited. Inconsistent activation of the intended neural target and co-activation of cutaneous sensory fibers are considered key limiting factors. In this study, we propose a novel approach that combines TENS with an implanted, electrically-conductive nerve cuff to reduce the stimulation amplitude needed to activate the tibial nerve. This enhanced version of TENS (called eTENS) was designed using a computational model of the rat tibial nerve and subsequently tested in anesthetized rats. Our computational model showed that eTENS can reduce the nerve activation threshold by a factor of up to 2.6. Similar effects were also achieved by in vivo experiments (1.4±0.1-fold decrease, n=5). Among various design parameters, spatial alignment between the surface electrode and the nerve cuff was identified as an important factor. Our results show that eTENS can improve the selective activation of the rat tibial nerve, but further work is needed to evaluate its use in clinical therapies.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain management in sickle cell disease

Background Sickle cell disease (SCD), one of the most common inherited disorders, is associated with vaso-occlusive pain episodes and haemolysis leading to recurrent morbidity, hospital admissions and work or school absenteeism. The crises are conventionally treated with opioids, non-opioids and other adjuvants with the risk of developing complications, addictions and drug-seeking behaviour. Different non-pharmacological treatments, such as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) have been used for managing pain in other painful conditions. Hence, the efficacy of TENS for managing pain in SCD needs to be reviewed. Objectives To assess the benefits and harms of TENS for managing pain in people with SCD who experience pain crises or chronic pain (or both). Search methods We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Haemoglobinopathies Register, comprising of references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched online trial registries and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Date of the last search: 26 Febraury 2020. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs, where TENS was evaluated for managing pain in people with SCD. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of the trials identified by the literature searches according to the inclusion criteria. Two review authors then independently extracted data, assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane standard tool and rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE guidelines. Main results One double-blind cross-over RCT with 22 participants with SCD (aged 12 to 27 years) was eligible for inclusion. Following stratification into four pain crises severity grades, participants were then randomised to receive TENS or placebo (sham TENS). The trial was concluded after 60 treatment episodes (30 treatment episodes of each treatment group). There is a lack of clarity regarding the trial design and the analysis of the cross-over data. If a participant was allocated to TENS treatment for an episode of pain and subsequently returned with a further episode of a similar degree of pain, they would then receive the sham TENS treatment (cross-over design). For those experiencing a pain episode of a different severity, it is not clear whether they were re-randomised or given the alternate treatment. Reporting and analysis was based on the total number pain events and not on the number of participants. It is unclear how many participants were crossed over from the TENS group to the sham TENS group and vice versa. The trial had a high risk of bias regarding random sequence generation and allocation concealment; an unclear risk regarding the blinding of participants and personnel; and a low risk regarding the blinding of the outcome assessors and selective outcome reporting. The trial was small and of very low quality; furthermore, given the issue with trial design we were unable to quantitatively analyse the data. Therefore, we present only a narrative summary and caution is advised in interpreting the results. In relation to our pre-defined primary outcomes, the included trial did not report pain relief at two to four weeks post intervention. The trial authors reported that no difference was found in the changes in pain ratings (recorded at one hour and four hours post intervention) between the TENS and the placebo groups. In relation to our secondary outcomes, the analgesic usage during the trial also did not show any difference between groups. Given the quality of the evidence, we are uncertain whether TENS improves overall satisfaction as compared to sham TENS. The ability to cope with activities of daily living was not evaluated. Regarding adverse events, although one case of itching was reported in the TENS group, the site and nature of itching was not clearly stated; hence it cannot be clearly attributed to TENS. Also, two participants receiving 'sham' TENS reported a worsening of pain with the intervention. Authors' conclusions Since we have only included one small and very low-quality trial, with a high risk of bias across several domains, we are unable to conclude whether TENS is harmful or beneficial for managing pain in people with SCD. There is a need for a well-designed, adequately-powered, RCT to evaluate the role of TENS in managing pain in people with SCD.

Efficacy of transcutaneous electronic nerve stimulation in alleviating pain during inferior alveolar nerve block injections in pediatric dentistry

Aim: This study was carried out with the aim of comparing the efficacy of Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and 20% benzocaine gel prior to inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) injections in alleviating pain in children of 8–12 years of age. Materials and Methods: The sample included fifty children in whom TENS application was done and fifty children in whom benzocaine topical application was done prior to administration of IANB injections for the extraction of mandibular posterior teeth. Pain perception was evaluated using Wong–Bakers Facial Pain Rating Scale in both the groups. ANOVA test was used to evaluate the differences in mean pain scores between the groups. Results: The patients demonstrated significant reduction in pain during IANB when TENS was used with a mean pain score of 3.36 as compared to topical application of local anesthetic agent with a mean pain score of 4.76, indicating higher efficacy of TENS. Conclusion: Application of TENS was more comfortable and significantly reduced pain. TENS is a safe, reliable, and practical alternative to be used in pediatric dentistry.