학술논문
THE EFFECT OF INTERFERENTIAL CURRENTS AND TENS ON PAIN AND FUNCTIONALITY IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC MECHANICAL LOW BACK PAIN
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Source
The Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery. January 2024, Vol. 35 Issue 1, p24, 7 p.
Subject
Language
English
ISSN
2147-5903
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Approximately to 23% of people worldwide suffer from chronic low back pain, with an estimated 24-80% of patients experiencing recurrence every year (1). Low back pain comprises an average [...]
Objective: This study aimed to compare the effects of interferential current (IFC) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on pain, disability, and flexibility for treating patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Materials and Methods: This study included 50 volunteer patients diagnosed with CLBP randomly assigned to IFC and TENS treatment. In addition to electrical stimulation, therapeutic ultrasound, hot packs, and exercise were administered to both groups. All patients underwent 20 sessions of treatment for 4 weeks and 5 days on weekdays. The Numerical Pain Scale, Oswestry Scale (ODI), and sit-and-reach test were used for evaluation. Patients were evaluated 3 times: before treatment, at the 10th session, and after treatment. The paired t-test was used for statistical analysis. Results: Significant improvement was seen in both treatment groups' pain levels when the levels of pain before and after treatment were compared. Before and after treatment, both groups in the sit-and-reach test and Oswestry evaluation showed a significant improvement (p>0.05). The change in pain and disability scores did not show superiority in the TENS and IFC groups (p>0.05). Only in the sit-and-reach test did the IFC group show significantly more improvement after the 20th session treatment (p=0.026). Conclusion: IFC and TENS should be used in patients with CLBP to control pain and improve function. However, studies with electrical currents determined by different biophysical parameters are needed to determine the superiority of TENS and IFC in terms of treatment outcome measures. Keywords: Low back pain, TENS, interferential current, rehabilitation
Objective: This study aimed to compare the effects of interferential current (IFC) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on pain, disability, and flexibility for treating patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Materials and Methods: This study included 50 volunteer patients diagnosed with CLBP randomly assigned to IFC and TENS treatment. In addition to electrical stimulation, therapeutic ultrasound, hot packs, and exercise were administered to both groups. All patients underwent 20 sessions of treatment for 4 weeks and 5 days on weekdays. The Numerical Pain Scale, Oswestry Scale (ODI), and sit-and-reach test were used for evaluation. Patients were evaluated 3 times: before treatment, at the 10th session, and after treatment. The paired t-test was used for statistical analysis. Results: Significant improvement was seen in both treatment groups' pain levels when the levels of pain before and after treatment were compared. Before and after treatment, both groups in the sit-and-reach test and Oswestry evaluation showed a significant improvement (p>0.05). The change in pain and disability scores did not show superiority in the TENS and IFC groups (p>0.05). Only in the sit-and-reach test did the IFC group show significantly more improvement after the 20th session treatment (p=0.026). Conclusion: IFC and TENS should be used in patients with CLBP to control pain and improve function. However, studies with electrical currents determined by different biophysical parameters are needed to determine the superiority of TENS and IFC in terms of treatment outcome measures. Keywords: Low back pain, TENS, interferential current, rehabilitation