» Articles » PMID: 34588809

High-Frequency Impulse Therapy for Treatment of Chronic Back Pain: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Pilot Study

Overview
Journal J Pain Res
Publisher Dove Medical Press
Date 2021 Sep 30
PMID 34588809
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to examine high-frequency impulse therapy (HFIT) impact on pain and function among patients undergoing care for chronic low back pain (CLBP).

Methods: A pilot randomized-controlled trial of HFIT system versus sham was conducted across 5 orthopedic and pain center sites in California, USA. Thirty-six patients seeking clinical care for CLBP were randomized. Primary outcome was function measured by the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Secondary outcomes were function (Timed Up and Go [TUG] and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), pain (Numerical Rating Scale [NRS]), quality of life (Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]), and device use. Patients were assessed at baseline and every week for 4 weeks of follow-up. Mann-Whitney -test was used to analyze changes in each outcome. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess the effect of treatment over time.

Results: The average age of subjects was 53.9 ± 15.7 (mean ± SD) years, with 12.1 ± 8.8 years of chronic low back pain. Patients who received an HFIT device had a significantly higher 6MWT score at weeks 2 [Cohen's (95% CI): 0.33 (0.02, 0.61)], 3 [0.32 (0.01, 0.59)] and 4 [0.31 (0.01, 0.60)], respectively, as compared to their baseline scores (p < 0.05). Patients in the treatment group had significantly lower TUG scores at week 3 [0.30 (0.04, 0.57)] and significantly lower NRS scores at weeks 2 [0.34 (0.02, 0.58)] and 4 [0.41 (0.10, 0.67)] (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: A larger-scale RCT can build on the findings of this study to test whether HFIT is effective in reducing pain and improving function in CLBP patients. This study shows encouraging evidence of functional improvement and reduction in pain in subjects who used HFIT. The efficacy and minimally invasive nature of HFIT is anticipated to substantially improve the management of CLBP patients.

Citing Articles

Redesigning Pharmacy to Improve Public Health Outcomes: Expanding Retail Spaces for Digital Therapeutics to Replace Consumer Products That Increase Mortality and Morbidity Risks.

Bulaj G, Coleman M, Johansen B, Kraft S, Lam W, Phillips K Pharmacy (Basel). 2024; 12(4).

PMID: 39051391 PMC: 11270305. DOI: 10.3390/pharmacy12040107.


Effectiveness of Hybrid Form Impulse Therapy (HFIT) Compared to Traditional Transcutaneous Electronic Nerve Stimulation (TENS) in Patients with Chronic Low Back and Knee Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Hong M, Krauss J, Wang G, Cohen K, Chaisson C, Gulati A J Pain Res. 2024; 17:2417-2430.

PMID: 39050679 PMC: 11268852. DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S461343.

References
1.
Hertzog M . Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Res Nurs Health. 2008; 31(2):180-91. DOI: 10.1002/nur.20247. View

2.
da Costa B, Nuesch E, Kasteler R, Husni E, Welch V, Rutjes A . Oral or transdermal opioids for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; (9):CD003115. PMC: 10993204. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003115.pub4. View

3.
Benyamin R, Trescot A, Datta S, Buenaventura R, Adlaka R, Sehgal N . Opioid complications and side effects. Pain Physician. 2008; 11(2 Suppl):S105-20. View

4.
Hughes N, Bennett M, Johnson M . An investigation into the magnitude of the current window and perception of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) sensation at various frequencies and body sites in healthy human participants. Clin J Pain. 2012; 29(2):146-53. DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e3182579919. View

5.
Wu L, Weng P, Chen C, Huang Y, Tsuang Y, Chiang C . Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Treating Chronic Back Pain. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018; 43(4):425-433. PMC: 5916478. DOI: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000740. View