This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Trancutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential therapy (IFT) have been a regular line of treatment for various types of acute and chronic pain. This review aims to compile the latest literature in pain management using these modalities which use low-frequency and medium-frequency currents. The Cochrane Library, Scopus, PubMed, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched and studies were examined from their inception till October 2013. After title and abstract screening the relevant studies were included for this review. We found through this review that even though TENS and IFT are used in management of pain, there is limited amount of high quality research available in this area. Most of the studies lack methodological quality and have a low sample size.
Keywords: Acute pain, Chronic pain, Electro physical modalities and electrotherapy, Interferential Therapy, Low-frequency currents, Medium frequency currents, Pain, Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation
Evidence-based practice is essential in clinical practice to hasten the recovery of a patient. In electrotherapy the applied energy is the trigger that stimulates or activates physiological events, which achieve therapeutic benefits that bring about pain relief.[1] In this review we would mainly focus on Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) and interferential therapy (IFT) which use low- and medium-frequency currents, respectively for pain relief.
The following databases were searched by the reviewers from their inception till October 2013, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, PubMed, MEDLINE, and CINAHL. After title and abstract screening randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews that compared active TENS/IFT in acute/chronic pain relief were included in this narrative review.
TENS relieves pain by inhibiting pain-related potentials on the spinal and supraspinal level, known as “gate control.” It is alternating current (AC) or modulated DC, comprising rectangular impulses. The analgesic effects of TENS is seen in both the ipsilateral and contralateral spinal segmental regions.[2,3]
Interferential therapy involves the use of “medium frequency” current to bring about the effect of a low-frequency (LF) current in the tissues. This is achieved by applying two “medium frequency” currents to the tissues, to generate LF interference current. Thus, the benefits of LF stimulation are achieved without the associated unpleasant side effects like pain, discomfort, skin irritation, etc.[4,5]
The history of using electric currents to treat pain goes back to 2500 BC where some stone carvings depict a species of catfish with organs that produce an electrical charge used to treat pain. The physician to the Roman Emperor Claudius in AD46 claimed that standing on an electric fish could relieve symptoms of pain.[6]
Melzack and Wall in 1965 published the gate-control theory with which increased the use of electroanalgesia.[7] This theory hypothesized that activity in small diameter nerve fibers causes pain and that, by stimulating the larger-diameter sensory nerve fibers, the perception of pain is reduced. They proposed that a physiological gating mechanism exists in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. This “gate” can be opened or closed to allow or inhibit the transmission of painful stimuli through it, and up to the brain where it is processed. By selectively exciting A-beta nerve fibers in the skin with TENS, the amount of painful stimulation being transmitted by smaller diameter nerve fibers can be reduced, through segmental inhibition.[6,7]
High frequency (HF) or conventional TENS (90-130Hz), causes the pain gate to close by stimulating the small A-beta sensory nerve fibers. Conventional TENS also acts by reducing the release of excitatory neurotransmitters such as aspartate and glutamate, increasing the release of inhibitory neurotransmitters such as gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and serotonin.[6]
LF TENS is also known as acupuncture TENS has a low pulse rate. It acts by stimulating the A-delta nerve fibers to produce endorphins which in turn relieve pain.[6]
Burst TENS stimulates both the A-beta and A-delta nerve types at the same time. In “burst” mode, conventional (HF) TENS is regularly interrupted by 2-3 “bursts” of lower frequency TENS. Different programs can be used interchangeably according to the preference of the patient.[6]
Kocygit et al. in 2012 published a randomized controlled trial which compared 20 patients with subacromial impingement with patients being randomized into low TENS and Sham groups. Both the groups were given painful stimuli before and after TENS treatment. They found on functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that in the LF TENS group, there was a statistically significant decrease in the perceived pain intensity and pain-specific activation of the contralateral primary sensory cortex, bilateral caudal anterior cingulate cortex, and of the ipsilateral supplementary motor area. They also reported in their results a statistically significant correlation between the change of Visual Analog Scale (VAS) value and the change of activity in the contralateral thalamus, prefrontal cortex, and the ipsilateral posterior parietal cortex. It was reported that the sham TENS group had no significant change in VAS value and activity of regions of interest.[2]
The results of this study support the efficacy of LF TENS in acute pain management. Although the sample size is low, MRI is a reliable tool in measuring the pain perceived by the individual.[2] Santos et al. in 2013 published a study done on rat paws wherein hyperalgesia and edema was induced by administering serotonin (5-HT). They applied LF and HF TENS on the right paw for 20 mins followed by serotonin induction. They used the Hargreaves method to measure nociception while the hydroplethysmometer was used to measure edema. Hargreaves method measures cutaneous hyperalgesia to thermal stimulation in animals. This study reported that neither HF nor LF TENS inhibited 5-HT-induced edema. However, LF TENS, but not HF TENS, completely reduced 5-HT-induced hyperalgesia. Pre-treatment of the paw with naltrexone, prior to application of TENS, showed a complete blockade of the analgesic effect induced by LF TENS.
This study supports the participation of peripheral endogenous opioid receptors in LF TENS analgesia in addition to its central action.[3]
LF TENS takes a longer time to achieve analgesia. Since the analgesia produced by the application of LF TENS is due to the release of endogenous opioids it lasts for a longer time. HF TENS or conventional TENS has a quick onset of analgesia but loses its effect quite rapidly when turning off the stimulation. The post-treatment analgesic effects of TENS can thus last anywhere between 5 minutes to 18 hours. It has been reported that in some patients’ pain levels do not return to pre-stimulation levels even after 24 hours.
Post-stimulation analgesia has been widely attributed to the accumulation or depletion of endogenous opioids. There is a wide variation in post treatment pain relief experienced by patients and no reason for this has been documented yet. Cheing et al. reported a cumulative effect in pain reduction after repeated applications of TENS and suggested that the mechanisms underlying this may be related to changes in the neuronal pathway. Breaks between sessions and/or changing electrode positions is essential as with long-term use, the nervous system becomes habituated to TENS, causing poorer pain control.[8]
We have given a brief description of important studies that used TENS for pain relief in Table 1 , while in Table 2 we have highlighted studies that focused on Low Frequency TENS.
Following is a summary of the important studies for TENS