Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37394276›Full record

ArticleThe Korean journal of pain2023

Comparison of the effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and interferential current therapies in central sensitization in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Şahide Eda Artuç, Aslı Çalışkan Uçkun, Filiz Acar Sivas, Fatma Gül Yurdakul, Hatice Bodur

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Korean journal of pain, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Şahide Eda ArtuçDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Health Sciences Ankara Gaziler Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5069-6331
Aslı Çalışkan UçkunDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, İzmir Bozyaka Education and Research Hospital, İzmir, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2492-4852
Filiz Acar SivasDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1705-9028
Fatma Gül YurdakulDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8630-9233
Hatice BodurDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3008-7007
Memorial Ankara Hospital · TRIzmir Bozyaka Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi · TRUniversity of Health Science · KH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study is primarily aimed to determine whether transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential current (IFC) treatments have any effect on central sensitization (CS) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to investigate which treatment is more effective. Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 80 patients were randomized into four treatment groups: TENS, Plasebo-TENS, IFC, and Plasebo-IFC. All interventions were applied 5 times a week for 2 weeks. Primary outcome was pressure pain threshold (PPT), which is accepted as the objective indicator of CS, at the painful knee and at the shoulder as a painless distant point. Other outcome measures were the visual analog scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Timed Up and Go Test, pain catastrophizing scale, Beck Depression Inventory, and Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia. Results: All assessment parameters were improved, without a significant difference among the groups except PPT. PPT scores were significantly improved in TENS and IFC groups when compared with the sham groups at 2 weeks and 3 months. In addition, this improvement was even more pronounced in the TENS group. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the patient's inclusion in the TENS group, an initial high PPT, and an initial low VAS score were independent risk factors for improvement in the PPT. Conclusions: This study shows that TENS and IFC reduced pain sensitivity as compared to placebo groups in patients with knee OA. This effect was more pronounced in the TENS group.

Indexed as

CatastrophizationCentral Nervous System SensitizationElectric Stimulation TherapyHyperalgesiaKinesiophobiaOsteoarthritis, KneePain ManagementPain ThresholdPhysical Therapy ModalitiesTranscutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID37394276
PMCPMC10322660
OpenAlexW4382895114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.