Two Transcutaneous Stimulation Techniques in Shoulder Pain: Transcutaneous Pulsed Radiofrequency (TPRF) versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS): A Comparative Pilot Study

Author:

Lin Mu-Lien12,Chiu Hung-Wei3,Shih Zao-Ming45,Lee Po-Ying6,Li Pei-Zhi6,Guo Chin-Hong6,Luo Yuan-Jie6,Lin Shen-Chieh7,Lin Kwan-Yu2,Hsu Yu-Ming6,Pang Angela8,Pang Weiwu9ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Anesthesiology, Assistant Professor, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan

2. Department of Anesthesiology, Taipei City Hospital, Zhongxing Branch, Taipei, Taiwan

3. Department of Electronic Engineering, Associate Professor, National Taipei University of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan

4. Feng Chia University, Taichung, Taiwan

5. Department of Emergency and Critical, Care Medicine, Kuang Tien General Hospital, No. 117, Shatian Road, Shalu District, Taichung City 433, Taiwan

6. Department of Electronic Engineering, National Taipei University of Technology, Taipei, Taiwan

7. Department of Surgery, Staff Physician, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan

8. Independent Scholar, Bachelor Degree of University of Florida in Psychology and English, 8257 Via Vivaldi, Orlando, FL, USA

9. Anesthesiologist, Kuang Tien General Hospital, No. 117, Shatian Road, Shalu District, Taichung City 433, Taiwan

Abstract

Objective. To compare the safety and efficacy of 2 transcutaneous stimulation techniques, transcutaneous pulsed radiofrequency (TPRF) versus transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), in chronic shoulder tendonitis. Design. A prospective, randomized, and double-blind clinical trial. Setting. Academic pain service of a city hospital. Subjects. Fifty patients with sonography-confirmed shoulder tendonitis. Methods. Fifty 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. Results. For 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. Conclusions. In treating chronic shoulder tendinitis using two transcutaneous stimulation techniques, both TPRF and TENS are safe and effective. TPRF is superior to TENS.

Funder

Taipei Hospital

Publisher

Hindawi Limited

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Neurology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3