Trial reportInternational wound journal2024
The role of TENS therapy in reducing the incidence of post-Caesarean section wound infection.
Trial report in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of TENS therapy in reducing the incidence of post-Caesarean section wound infection.International wound journal · 2024Trial
- Article
- Design dimensions of electrocutaneous warning stimulation patterns in workplace safety devices.PloS one · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The occurrence of wound infection following a Caesarean section procedure poses a substantial clinical obstacle. Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) has been identified as a promising supplementary treatment option for improving the healing process and decreasing the incidence of infections. This study assessed the efficacy of TENS therapy in the postoperative care of patients who have had Caesarean section. We randomly assigned a total of 108 women who had Caesarean sections to either a TENS group (n = 54) or control (n = 54). The TENS therapy was provided twice daily for a duration of 30 min for the period of 14 days following the surgery. The main measure of interest in this study was the occurrence of wound infection during 30-day period. Additionally, secondary measures included the rate of wound healing, levels of pain experienced and level of patient satisfaction. In comparison to the control (22.2%, p < 0.05), the TENS group had notably reduced occurrence of wound infection, with the rate of 7.4%. TENS group had superior wound healing results, as measured by REEDA scale, at 7 days (2.1 ± 0.8 vs. 2.5 ± 1.0, p < 0.04), 14 days (1.2 ± 0.5 vs. 1.9 ± 0.7, p < 0.05) and 30 days (0.3 ± 0.5 vs. 0.7 ± 0.6, p < 0.05). Furthermore, TENS group had reduced pain levels on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at all evaluation intervals (p < 0.05). TENS group exhibited significantly higher levels of patient satisfaction, as evidenced by 64.8% of participants rating high satisfaction, in contrast to 40.7% in the control group (p < 0.05). The incidence of adverse effects was found to be minor, as indicated by a skin irritation rate of 3.7% and reported discomfort rate of 1.9% at the electrode location. TENS therapy effectively decreased the occurrence of post-Caesarean wound infections, expedited the healing process and enhanced pain control. This treatment was well-received by patients and had little negative consequences. The aforementioned results provided evidence in favour of incorporating TENS into post-Caesarean care regimens, which may have significant consequences for improving patient outcomes and maximizing healthcare resources.
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.