ArticlePain and therapy2024
H-Wave
Article in Pain and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of EMS, IFC, and TENS on patient-reported outcome measures for chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024Pooled it
- H-WaveMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Observational
- H-Wave device stimulation benefits chronic shoulder pain in an observational cohort study of patient-reported outcome measures.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- A Long-Term Retrospective Observational Clinical Study Evaluating the Efficacy of Plasma Rich in Growth Factors (PRGF) in the Treatment of Back Pain.Pain and therapy · 2025Article
- Article
- H-WavePain and therapy · 2024Article
- Review
- Editorial: Insight in musculoskeletal pain-2023.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation vs. H-Wave® device stimulation-similar or different?Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionChronic low back pain (cLBP) is a problem globally, creating a tremendous economic burden. Since conventional treatments often fail, various forms of electrical stimulation have been proposed to improve function and decrease pain. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have not been adequately reported in the electrical stimulation literature.
methodsA retrospective independent statistical analysis was conducted on PROMs data for users of H-Wave
resultsReported pain was reduced by 3.12 points (0-10 pain scale), with significant (≥ 20%) relief in 85.28%. Function/activities of daily living (ADL) improved in 96.36%, while improved work performance was reported in 81.61%. Medication use decreased or stopped in 64.41% and sleep improved in 59.76%. Over 96% reported having expectations met or exceeded, service satisfaction, and confidence in device use, while no adverse events were reported. Subgroup analyses found positive associations with longer duration of device use, home exercise participation, and working, whereas older age and longer pain chronicity resulted in reduced benefit. Similar analysis of the larger all-diagnoses cohort demonstrated near-equivalent positive outcomes.
conclusionTreatment outcomes directly reported by cLBP HWDS patients demonstrated profound positive effects on function and ADL, robust improvement in pain perception, and additional benefits like decreased medication use, better sleep, and improved work performance, representing compelling new evidence of treatment efficacy.
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.