ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2021
Resolving Long-Standing Uncertainty about the Clinical Efficacy of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) to Relieve Pain: A Comprehensive Review of Factors Influencing Outcome.
Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Dose-Response Effects of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- The healing power of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation: a systematic review on its effects after breast surgery.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Characterising the Features of 381 Clinical Studies Evaluating Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Pain Relief: A Secondary Analysis of the Meta-TENS Study to Improve Future Research.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Pooled it
- Efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in people with pain after spinal cord injury: a meta-analysis.Spinal cord · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The effects of EXOPULSE Mollii Suit in patients with fibromyalgia: a double-blind randomized sham-controlled trial (EXOFIB2).Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2026Trial
- [Electrotherapy and sensory re-education as a treatment for chemotherapy-induced neuropathy].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Trial
- A Comparison Study Between Electrical Muscle Stimulation and Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Treatment of Myofascial Pain Syndrome.Artificial organs · 2025Trial
- The effect of the EXOPULSE Mollii Suit on pain and fibromyalgia-related symptoms-A randomized sham-controlled crossover trial.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025Trial
- The effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on fatigue recovery in recreational rowers.PeerJ · 2025Trial
- An Open-Label Comparative Study of the Impact of Two Types of Electrical Stimulation (Direct Current Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation and Transcutaneous Electrical Stimulation) on Physical Therapy Treatment of Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy.Journal of diabetes research · 2025Trial
- Electromagnetic Induction for Treatment of Unspecific Back Pain: A Prospective Randomized Sham-Controlled Clinical Trial.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic neck pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Dose-response effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2026Article
- Breathing-Controlled Electrical Stimulation (BreEStim) Selectively Modulates Affective and Cognitive Components of Pain-An EEG Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation vs Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation With Music in Persistent Low-Back Pain: Protocol for a Pilot Feasibility Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS), Interferential Current (IFC) and Percutaneous Needle Electrolysis (PNE) in the treatment of sports-related pain: a scoping review with an evidence gap map.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Electromagnetic neuromodulation for chronic pain: historical context, contemporary modalities, and evidence gaps.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of Nonpharmacological Therapies for Pregnancy-Related Low Back and Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Orthopedic reviews · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pain is managed using a biopsychosocial approach and pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a technique whereby pulsed electrical currents are administered through the intact surface of the skin with the intention of alleviating pain, akin to 'electrically rubbing pain away'. Despite over 50 years of published research, uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of TENS remains. The purpose of this comprehensive review is to critically appraise clinical research on TENS to inform future strategies to resolve the 'efficacy-impasse'. The principles and practices of TENS are described to provide context for readers unfamiliar with TENS treatment. The findings of systematic reviews evaluating TENS are described from a historical perspective to provide context for a critical evaluation of factors influencing the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs); including sample populations, outcome measures, TENS techniques, and comparator interventions. Three possibilities are offered to resolve the impasse. Firstly, to conduct large multi-centered RCTs using an enriched enrolment with randomized withdrawal design, that incorporates a 'run-in phase' to screen for potential TENS responders and to optimise TENS treatment according to individual need. Secondly, to meta-analyze published RCT data, irrespective of type of pain, to determine whether TENS reduces the intensity of pain during stimulation, and to include a detailed assessment of levels of certainty and precision. Thirdly, to concede that it may be impossible to determine efficacy due to insurmountable methodological, logistical and financial challenges. The consequences to clinicians, policy makers and funders of this third scenario are discussed. I argue that patients will continue to use TENS irrespective of the views of clinicians, policy makers, funders or guideline panel recommendations, because TENS is readily available without prescription; TENS generates a pleasant sensory experience that is similar to easing pain using warming and cooling techniques; and technological developments such as smart wearable TENS devices will improve usability in the future. Thus, research is needed on how best to integrate TENS into existing pain management strategies by analyzing data of TENS usage by expert-patients in real-world settings.
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.