ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Effect of Percutaneous Electric Stimulation with High-Frequency Alternating Currents on the Sensory-Motor System of Healthy Volunteers: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acute Effect of Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation on Postural Control: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2025Trial
- Temporal properties of transcutaneous direct current motor conduction block.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Article
- Transcutaneous Kilohertz High-Frequency Alternating Current at 10 kHz for Upper-Limb Tremor in People with Parkinson's Disease: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Crossover Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Effect of percutaneous electrical stimulation with high-frequency alternating currents at 30 kHz on the sensory-motor system.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Former studies investigated the application of high-frequency alternating currents (HFAC) in humans for blocking the peripheral nervous system. The present trial aims to assess the effect of HFAC on the motor response, somatosensory thresholds, and peripheral nerve conduction when applied percutaneously using frequencies of 10 kHz and 20 kHz in healthy volunteers. A parallel, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted. Ultrasound-guided HFAC at 10 kHz and 20 kHz and sham stimulation were delivered to the median nerve of 60 healthy volunteers for 20 min. The main assessed variables were the maximum isometric flexion strength (MFFS) of the index finger, myotonometry, pressure pain threshold (PPT), mechanical detection threshold (MDT), and sensory nerve action potential (SNAP). A decrease in the MFFS is observed immediately postintervention compared to baseline, both in the 10 kHz group (-8.5%; 95% CI -14.9 to -2.1) and the 20 kHz group (-12.0%; 95% CI -18.3 to -5.6). The between-group comparison of changes in MFFS show a greater reduction of -10.8% (95% CI -19.8 to -1.8) immediately postintervention in the 20 kHz compared to the sham stimulation group. The percutaneous stimulation applying 20 kHz HFAC to the median nerve produces a reversible postintervention reduction in strength with no adverse effects.
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.