Modification of Experimental, Lower Limb Ischemic Pain With Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) has been shown to be effective for the reduction of experimentally induced ischemic pain in the upper limb. No studies have been published on the effects of TENS for lower limb ischemic pain. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the pain-modifying effect of TENS on experimentally induced ischemic pain in the lower limb. METHODS: A modified Submaximal Effort Tourniquet Test-induced ischemic pain in the nondominant lower limb of 27 healthy volunteers. Each of the participants completed a baseline modified Submaximal Effort Tourniquet Test (No TENS) and 1 of the experimental conditions: either high-frequency TENS (HF-TENS) or placebo TENS (P-TENS). The outcome measures were the time taken (in seconds) for the participants to report pain threshold and pain tolerance. Pain endurance was calculated as the difference between these points. Pain intensity during ischemia was assessed using a numerical rating scale. The McGill Pain Questionnaire recorded participants' retrospective description of 'intolerable' induced pain. The differences in scores between these measures at the baseline and TENS intervention was calculated and used for the analysis. RESULTS: Paired Student t-tests found significant increases in time to pain tolerance and pain endurance in both the TENS groups (P<0.001 HF-TENS and P<0.05 for P-TENS, respectively). When compared with baseline, time to pain threshold increased significantly only with HF-TENS (P<0.01). The independent Student t-tests detected greater increases in pain threshold, tolerance, and endurance in the HF-TENS group compared with the P-TENS group (P<0.05, 0.002, and 0.003, respectively). Compared with P-TENS, HF-TENS significantly reduced the pain intensity between the fifth and eigth minutes. Both HF-TENS and P-TENS significantly reduced the mean McGill Pain Questionnaire Pain Rating Index scores, but did not show a between-group difference. CONCLUSIONS: HF-TENS had stronger modifying effects on several aspects of laboratory-induced ischemic pain than did P-TENS. HF-TENS delayed the onset of pain, reduced pain levels, and delayed the onset of extreme pain over a period of several minutes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".