Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20464749›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults.

Matthew R Mulvey, Anne-Marie Bagnall, Mark I Johnson, Paul R Marchant

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) for cancer pain in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Role of rehabilitation medicine and physical agents in the treatment of cancer-associated pain.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2014
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matthew R MulveyFaculty of Health, Leeds Metropolitan University, Civic Quarter, Leeds, West Yorkshire, UK, LS1 3HE.
Anne-Marie Bagnall
Mark I Johnson
Paul R Marchant
Leeds Beckett University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAmputee pain may present in a body part that has been amputated (phantom pain) or at the site of amputation (stump pain), or both. Phantom pain and stump pain are complex and multidimensional and the underlying pathophysiology remains unclear. The mainstay treatments for phantom pain and stump pain are predominately pharmacological. The condition remains a severe burden for those who are affected by it. There is increasing acknowledgement of the need for non-drug interventions and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) may have an important role to play. TENS has been recommended as a treatment option for phantom pain and stump pain. To date there has been no systematic review of available evidence and the effectiveness of TENS for phantom pain and stump pain is currently unknown.

objectivesTo assess the analgesic effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, PEDRO and SPORTDiscus (February 2010). SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain following an amputation in adults were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. It was planned that where available and appropriate, data from outcome measures were to be pooled and presented as an overall estimate of the effectiveness of TENS. MAIN

resultsNo RCTs that examined the effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain in adults were identified by the searches. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere were no RCTs on which to judge the effectiveness of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain. The published literature on TENS for phantom pain and stump pain lacks the methodological rigour and robust reporting needed to confidently assess its effectiveness. Further RCT evidence is required before such a judgement can be made.

Indexed as

Pain ManagementTranscutaneous Electric Nerve StimulationAdultAmputation StumpsHumansPhantom Limb

Identifiers

PMID20464749
OpenAlexW4251366186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.