ArticleInternational wound journal2023
Activation of healing and reduction of pain by single-use automated microcurrent electrical stimulation therapy in patients with hard-to-heal wounds.
Article in International wound journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced Antibacterial Dressings for Chronic Ulcers: Alginate-Collagen-Cotton Hydrogel Composites Functionalized with Green CuO Nanoparticles.Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
- Antimicrobial Strategies for Chronic Cutaneous Ulcers: From Preclinical Nanotechnology to Clinical Practice.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Electrical Stimulation Therapy in the Treatment of Chronic Wounds: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and Economic Analysis.Journal of market access & health policy · 2025Review
- Enhancing Burn Recovery: A Systematic Review on the Benefits of Electrical Stimulation in Accelerating Healing.European burn journal · 2025Review
- Reduce electrical overload via threaded Chinese acupuncture in nerve electrical therapy.Bioactive materials · 2025Article
- Article
- Activation of healing and reduction of pain by single-use automated microcurrent electrical stimulation therapy in patients with hard-to-heal wounds.International wound journal · 2023Article
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 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evidence shows that Electrical Stimulation Therapy (EST) accelerates healing and reduces pain, but EST has yet to become widely used. One reason is the historical use of complex, clinic-based EST devices. This evaluation assessed the early response of different hard-to-heal wounds to a simple, wearable, single-use, automated microcurrent EST device (Accel-Heal, Accel-Heal Technologies Limited - Hever, UK). Forty wounds (39 patients: 18 female - 21 male), mean age 68.9 ± 14.0 years comprised of: seven post-surgical, three trauma, 12 diabetic foot (DFU), 10 venous (VLU), four pressure injuries (PI), four mixed venous or arterial ulcers (VLU/arterial) received automated microcurrent EST for 12 days. Early clinical responses were scored on a 0-5 scale (5-excellent-0-no response). Pain was assessed at 48 h, seven days, and 14 days on a 0-10 visual analogue scale (VAS). Overall, 78% of wounds showed a marked positive clinical response (scores of 5 and 4). Sixty eight percent of wounds were painful with a mean VAS score of 5.5. Almost every patient (96%) with pain experienced reduction within 48 h. All patients with painful wounds experienced pain reduction after seven days: 2.50 VAS (45% reduction) and further pain reduction after 14 days: 1.83 VAS (33%).
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.