RESEARCH PAPER
Evaluation of acute low back pain in women after treatment with interferential current
1
Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná, Brazil
Corresponding author
Gladson Ricardo Flor Bertolini
Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná, Rua Universitária, 2069., 85819110, Cascavel, Brazil
Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná, Rua Universitária, 2069., 85819110, Cascavel, Brazil
J Pre Clin Clin Res. 2019;13(2):57-60
KEYWORDS
pain managementmusculoskeletal painacute painlow back paintranscutaneous electric nerve stimulationelectric stimulation therapy
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction and objectives.:
Low back pain has become one of the major public health problems worldwide. Treatment is by the use of analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, but it must be taken into account that these have side-effects. Therefore, non-pharmacological therapies may be beneficial in patients at greater risk of developing chronic pain and disability, aiming to decrease pain. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of the Interferential current in women with acute low back pain.
Material and methods:
The study included female patients, aged 18 – 35 years, who had acute low back pain. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) of Pain and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used for evaluation. The patients received Interferential current in the bipolar form, the parameters were base current of 2 kHz, AMF 50 Hz, which was performed for 20 minutes daily, for 3 non-consecutive days in the week, for 4 weeks, totaling 12 therapies.
Results:
For evaluation of pain intensity, no difference was observed in the control group with a small effect size, but the treated group had a large effect size. For the ODI, comparison within the group showed no difference for the control group, but there was a decrease in the values for the treated group.
Conclusions:
It was found that the Interferential current was effective in the reduction of acute low back pain and functional improvement.
Low back pain has become one of the major public health problems worldwide. Treatment is by the use of analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, but it must be taken into account that these have side-effects. Therefore, non-pharmacological therapies may be beneficial in patients at greater risk of developing chronic pain and disability, aiming to decrease pain. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of the Interferential current in women with acute low back pain.
Material and methods:
The study included female patients, aged 18 – 35 years, who had acute low back pain. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) of Pain and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used for evaluation. The patients received Interferential current in the bipolar form, the parameters were base current of 2 kHz, AMF 50 Hz, which was performed for 20 minutes daily, for 3 non-consecutive days in the week, for 4 weeks, totaling 12 therapies.
Results:
For evaluation of pain intensity, no difference was observed in the control group with a small effect size, but the treated group had a large effect size. For the ODI, comparison within the group showed no difference for the control group, but there was a decrease in the values for the treated group.
Conclusions:
It was found that the Interferential current was effective in the reduction of acute low back pain and functional improvement.
REFERENCES (26)
1.
Balagué F, Mannion AF, Pellisé F, Cedraschi C. Non-specific low back pain. Lancet. 2012;379(9814):482–91.
2.
Clark S, Horton R. Low back pain: a major global challenge. Lancet. 2018;391(10137):2302.
3.
Hill JC, Whitehurst DGT, Lewis M, Bryan S, Dunn KM, Foster NE, et al. Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9802):1560–71.
4.
Taylor JB, Goode AP, George SZ, Cook CE. Incidence and risk factors for first-time incident low back pain: a systematic review and meta- analysis. Spine J. 2020;14(10):2299–319.
6.
Maher C, Underwood M, Buchbinder R. Non-specific low back pain. Lancet. 2017;389(10070):736–47.
7.
Ariel E, Ratmansky M, Levkovitz Y, Goor-Aryeh I. Efficiency of tissue penetration by currents induced by three electrotherapeutic techniques: a comparative study using a novel deep-tissue measuring technique. Phys Ther. 2019;Epub ahead.
8.
Rajfur J, Pasternok M, Rajfur K, Walewicz K, Fras B, Bolach B, et al. Efficacy of selected electrical therapies on chronic low back pain: a comparative clinical pilot study. Med Sci Monit. 2017;23:85–100.
9.
Silva EPR da, Silva VR da, Bernardes AS, Matuzawa FM, Liebano RE. Study protocol of hypoalgesic effects of low frequency and burst- modulated alternating currents on healthy individuals. Pain Manag. 2018;8(2):71–7.
10.
Albornoz-Cabello M, Espejo-Antúnez L, Heredia-Rizo AM, Domínguez-Maldonado G, Maya-Martín J. Effect of interferential current therapy on pain perception and disability level in subjects with chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2016; 31(2):242–9.
11.
Almeida CC de, Silva VZM da, Cipriano Júnior G, Liebano RE, Durigan JLQ. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and interferential current demonstrate similar effects in relieving acute and chronic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Brazilian J Phys Ther. 2018;22(5):347–54.
12.
Falavigna A, Teles AR, De Braga GL, Barazzetti DO, Lazzaretti L, Tregnago AC. Instrumentos de avaliação clínica e funcional em cirurgia da coluna vertebral. Coluna/Columna. 2011; 10(1):62–7.
13.
Zivkovic VD, Stankovic I, Dimitrijevic L, Kocic M, Colovic H, Vlajkovic M, et al. Are interferential electrical stimulation and diaphragmatic breathing exercises beneficial in children with bladder and bowel disfunction? Urology. 2016; 102:207–12.
14.
Maeda K, Koga T, Akagi J. Interferential current sensory stimulation, through the neck skin, improves airway defense and oral nutrition intake in patients with dysphagia: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Clin Interv Aging. 2017;12:1879–86.
15.
Jin H-Y, Hwang T-Y, Cho S-H. Effect of electrical stimulation on blood flow velocity and vessel size. Open Med. 2017;12:5–11.
16.
Bellew JW, Beiswanger Z, Freeman E, Gaerte C, Trafton J. Interferential and burst-modulated biphasic pulsed currents yield greater muscular force than Russian current. Physiother Theory Pract. 2012;28(5):384–90.
17.
Kadi MR, Hepgüler S, Atamaz FC, Dede E, Aydogdu S, Aktuglu K, et al. Is interferential current effective in the management of pain, range of motion, and edema following total knee arthroplasty surgery? A randomized double-blind controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2019;Epub ahead.
18.
Nazligul T, Akpinar P, Aktas I, Ozkan FU, Hartevioglu HC. The effect of interferential current therapy on patients with subacromial impingement syndrome:a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2018;54(3):351–7.
19.
Lara-Palomo IC, Aguilar-Ferrándiz ME, Matarán-Peñarrocha GA, Saavedra-Hernández M, Granero-Molina J, Fernández-Sola C, et al. Short-term effects of interferential current electro- massage in adults with chronic non-specific low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2012;27(5):439–49.
20.
Franco YRS, Franco KFM, Silva LA, Silva MO, Rodrigues MN, Liebano RE, et al. Does the use of interferential current prior to pilates exercises accelerate improvement of chronic nonspecific low back pain? Pain Manag. 2018;8(6):465–74.
21.
Franco KM, Franco Y dos S, Oliveira NB de, Miyamoto GC, Santos MO, Liebano RE, et al. Is interferential current before Pilates exercises more effective than placebo in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain?: A randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;98(2):320–8.
22.
Hurley DA, McDonough SM, Dempster M, Moore AP, Baxter GD. A randomized clinical trial of manipulative therapy and interferential therapy for acute low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004;29(20):2207– 16.
23.
Venancio RC, Pelegrini S, Gomes Q, Nakano EY, Liebano E. Effects of carrier frequency of interferential current on pressure pain threshold and sensory comfort in humans. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(1):95– 102.
24.
Palmer ST, Martin DJ, Steedman WM, Ravey J, St AP, Dj M, et al. Alteration of interferential current and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation frequency: effects on nerve excitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80(9):1065–71.
25.
Beatti A, Rayner A, Chipchase L, Souvlis T. Penetration and spread of interferential current in cutaneous, subcutaneous and muscle tissues. Physiotherapy. 2011;97(4):319–26.
26.
Fiori A, Cescon CLC, Galesky JDF, Santos TACD, Brancalhaõ RMC, Bertolini GRF. Comparison between bipolar and tetrapolar of the interferential current in nociceptive threshold, accommodation and pleasantness in healthy individuals. Eur J Physiother. 2014;16(4):201–5.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1898-7516 |
| ISSN: | 1898-2395 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
