The below post was made on Dec. 31, 2007 in response to article, "The Truth Behind Electric Waves For Pain Relief".
Response:
The author makes some interesting points here but the generalizations being made are without foundation or merit.
The title insertion of "electric waves" is illustrative of the misunderstanding of the subject matter. I'm not criticizing the author but pointing out the absurdity of many arguments that are made without knowledge of the subject being discussed.
The historic context of "electric waves" is one of the use of direct current, ie. the early Biblical references of "eels" and putting one's body part in the water for the shock effect which for some caused short/midterm pain relief. DC ( direct current ) is the form of electric waves upon which the historical context is discussed. Galvani used DC to stimulate frog legs to "jump",even after death, is one of the classics of "electric waves".
There is a plethora of research articles, most not double blind due to the sensory effect of electrical stimulation being felt, that have supported the use of E-stim for pain relief, be it chronic or acute. HCFA - Medicare, most major insurance companies, state funded health care ( Medicaid , Worker's comp programs- local and national, all relied upon the research to make their decisions to cover the cost of tens and it's associated supplies as an effective, cost efficient method of pain control for chronic pain and in some cases for acute pain if used for post surgical applications.
One of the most effective forms of electrotherapy , note I say electrotherapy, not electric waves, is the use of interferential therapy both clinically and now as an outpatient therapy. Electricity, interferential, is merely agents of the electromagnetic spectrum of which there are literally billions of combinations. Interferential is the use of 8,000+ pulses of electricity ( AC- alternatng current the difference in discussing electrotherapy now and in the past ) administered transcutaneously per second. This compares to "tens" which is generally 150 pulses per second.
Interferential ( IF) gives immediate results and also tends to have long term carryover relief for the patient. Carryover is the time one has significant pain relief prior to needing another treatment. Now having said that Interferential is still regarded, 60 years later, as "experimental" but is the most used form of electrotherapy for pain relief. TENS is not in any manner regarded as experimental nor is the efficicacy of the modality in question.
I find the article similar to describing Edison using electricity to create a light and one now saying comparing that ancient use to the microchips that used to promote our everyday lives lacks scientific evidence. There's really no comparison and the earlier results of Edison paved the way to greater understanding to create the complex chips we have today which benefit us all.
This type article fails to inform and is based upon archaic knowledge, or lack thereof, of the field.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Responding to the "Truth" Behind Electric Waves
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Chronic Pain and Electrotherapy - New NIH Study
Interferential/Tens for Chronic Low Back Pain ( CLBP)
NIH report from NIH on use of above for rehab. and pain reduction using both forms of electrotherapy. Here is post.
Summary below:
Interferential and horizontal therapies in chronic low back pain: a randomized, double blind, clinical study.
Zambito A, Bianchini D, Gatti D, Viapiana O, Rossini M, Adami S.
Rheumatologic Rehabilitation, University of Verona, Italy.
OBJECTIVE: Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP) is one of the most frequent medical problems. Electrical nerve stimulation is frequently used but its efficacy remains controversial. METHODS: Twenty-six men and 94 women with CLBP associated with either degenerative disk disease or previous multiple vertebral osteoporotic fractures were randomly assigned to either interferential currents (IFT), horizontal therapy (HT) or sham HT administered for 10, 40 and 40 minutes, respectively, daily for 5 days per week for two weeks together with a standard flexion-extension stretching exercise program, Blind efficacy assessment were obtained at baseline and at week 2, 6 and 14 and included a functional questionnaire (Backill), the standard visual analog scale (VAS) and the mean analgesic consumption. RESULTS: At week 2 a significant and similar improvement in both the VAS and Backill score was observed in all three groups. The Backill score continued to improve only in the two active groups with changes significantly greater than those observed in control patients at week 14. The pain VAS score returned to baseline values at week 6 and 14 in the control group while in the IFT and HT groups it continued to improve (p< 0.01 vs controls). The use of analgesic medications significantly improved at week 14 versus pretreatment assessment and over control patients only in the HT group. CONCLUSION: This randomized double-blind controlled study provides the first evidence that IFT and HT therapy are significantly effective in alleviating both pain and disability in patients with CLBP. The placebo effect is remarkable at the beginning of the treatment but it tends to vanish within a couple of weeks.
Posted by Bob Johnson, Peddler at 6:31 AM 0 comments
Labels: electrotherapy, infrex, interferential, MedFaxx, tens
Monday, December 10, 2007