Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41209542›Full record

Trial reportClinical interventions in aging2025

Effect of Different Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Modalities on Clinical and Functional Outcomes in Older Adults with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Camila Cadena De Almeida, Klaus Porto Azevedo, José Roberto De Souza Júnior, Leandro Andrade Moreira, Patrícia Azevedo Garcia, Isabella Silva Almeida, Lucas Ogura Dantas, Rita de Cassia Marqueti, Josimari Melo DeSantana, João Luiz Quagliotti Durigan

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical interventions in aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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

10 authors.

Camila Cadena De AlmeidaUniversidade de Brasília, Laboratory of Muscle and Tendon Plasticity, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Klaus Porto AzevedoUniversidade de Brasília, Laboratory of Muscle and Tendon Plasticity, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
José Roberto De Souza JúniorUniversidade de Brasília, Laboratory of Muscle and Tendon Plasticity, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Leandro Andrade MoreiraUniversidade de Brasília, Laboratory of Muscle and Tendon Plasticity, Brasília, DF, Brazil.ORCID 0009-0009-4495-220X
Patrícia Azevedo GarciaUniversidade de Brasília, Laboratory of Muscle and Tendon Plasticity, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Isabella Silva AlmeidaUniversidade de Brasília, Laboratory of Muscle and Tendon Plasticity, Brasília, DF, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-9778-2800
Lucas Ogura DantasUniversidade Federal de São Carlos, São Carlos, SP, Brazil.
Rita de Cassia MarquetiUniversidade de Brasília, Laboratory of Muscle and Tendon Plasticity, Brasília, DF, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-9126-3882
Josimari Melo DeSantanaUniversidade Federal de Sergipe, Physical Therapy Department, Aracaju, Sergipe, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1432-0737
João Luiz Quagliotti DuriganUniversidade de Brasília, Laboratory of Muscle and Tendon Plasticity, Brasília, DF, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic degenerative disease characterized by progressive cartilage degeneration, most commonly affecting the knee. Clinical symptoms such as pain, stiffness, and functional limitations significantly impact quality of life. Although neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is considered a complementary treatment, evidence comparing different waveforms in clinical management remains limited. Objective: To compare the effects of three different NMES waveforms versus a placebo, applied for four weeks, on pain intensity, disability, and other functional outcomes in individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Methods: A randomized clinical trial with 100 participants equally assigned to four groups: transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) (n=25), interferential current (IFC) (n=25), Aussie current (n=25), and placebo (n=25). Primary outcomes were pain intensity, disability, and pressure pain threshold and secondary outcomes included aerobic capacity, gait speed, lower limb strength, functional mobility, superficial knee temperature, stability, and fall risk. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed before and after four weeks. Results: A significant group x time interaction, with a moderate effect size, was found for the WOMAC index (P = 0.022; η Conclusion: Different NMES protocols did not provide additional benefits over placebo for pain intensity, disability or functional outcomes in people with KOA. These findings highlight the need for further research to refine stimulation protocols and identify patient subgroups that may benefit most from NMES in the management of knee osteoarthritis.

Indexed as

Electric Stimulation TherapyOsteoarthritis, KneeTranscutaneous Electric Nerve StimulationAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPain ThresholdQuality of LifeTreatment Outcomeknee osteoarthritisneuromuscular electrical stimulationolder adults

Identifiers

PMID41209542
PMCPMC12595927

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.