ArticleJournal of pain research2015
Skin impedance is not a factor in transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation effectiveness.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The influence of skin physicochemical properties on electrical sensory sensitivity during transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in women.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Spinal excitability following sensory electrical stimulation of the upper limb.Physiological reports · 2025Article
- Electrode Placement Affects Clinical Outcome in Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Combined Cadaver Study and Randomized Controlled Trial.Pain and therapy · 2025Article
- Resolving Long-Standing Uncertainty about the Clinical Efficacy of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) to Relieve Pain: A Comprehensive Review of Factors Influencing Outcome.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
- Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation of the Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire in Dutch Healthy Volunteers.Pain research & management · 2020Article
- Development of a method to maximize the transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation intensity in women with fibromyalgia.Journal of pain research · 2018Article
- Does transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation reduce pain and improve quality of life in patients with idiopathic chronic orchialgia? A randomized controlled trial.Journal of pain research · 2018Article
- The Vascular Factor Plays the Main Role in the Cause of Pain in Men with Chronic Prostatitis and Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: The Results of Clinical Trial on Thermobalancing Therapy.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTranscutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a nonpharmacological intervention used to manage pain using skin surface electrodes. Optimal electrode placement is unclear. We hypothesized that better analgesia would occur if electrodes were placed over sites with lower skin impedance. Optimal site selection (OSS) and sham site selection (SSS) electrode sites on the forearm were identified using a standard clinical technique.
methodsExperiment 1 measured skin impedance in the forearm at OSS and SSS. Experiment 2 was a crossover design double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing OSS-TENS, SSS-TENS, and placebo TENS (P-TENS) to confirm differences in skin impedance between OSS and SSS, and measure change in pressure pain threshold (PPT) following a 30-minute TENS treatment. Healthy volunteers were recruited (ten for Experiment 1 [five male, five female] and 24 for Experiment 2 [12 male, 12 female]). TENS was applied for 30 minutes at 100 Hz frequency, 100 µs pulse duration, and "strong but nonpainful" amplitude.
resultsExperiment 1 results demonstrate significantly higher impedance at SSS (17.69±1.24 Ω) compared to OSS (13.53±0.57 Ω) (P=0.007). For Experiment 2, electrode site impedance was significantly higher over SSS, with both the impedance meter (P=0.001) and the TENS unit (P=0.012) compared to OSS. PPT change was significantly greater for both OSS-TENS (P=0.024) and SSS-TENS (P=0.025) when compared to P-TENS. PPT did not differ between the two active TENS treatments (P=0.81).
conclusionSkin impedance is lower at sites characterized as optimal using the described technique of electrode site selection. When TENS is applied at adequate intensities, skin impedance is not a factor in attainment of hypoalgesia of the forearm in healthy subjects. Further investigation should include testing in patients presenting with painful conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.