Wearable transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (actiTENS®) is effective and safe for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis pain: a randomized controlled trial <i>versus</i> weak opioids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Despite their poor tolerance, especially in the elderly, weak opioids (WO) remain commonly prescribed for patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). We compared the efficacy and safety of a new wearable transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (W-TENS) device with WO for the treatment of moderate-to-severe, nociceptive KOA chronic pain. Methods: The study was a non-inferiority, multicentric, prospective, randomized, single-blind, controlled, 2-parallel groups Trial. A total of 110 patients with KOA were included (Kellgren-Lawrence radiographic grade ⩾2; American College of Rheumatology criteria), with chronic moderate-to-severe nociceptive pain (mean 8-day pain intensity (PI) ⩾ 4 on an 11-point numerical rating scale), in failure to non-opioid analgesics, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Patients with neuropathic pain were excluded. The co-primary endpoints were mean PI at 3 months (M3) and number of potentially treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Secondary outcomes included Western Ontario MAC Master University function subscale (range, 0–68), additional pain and quality of life measures, and responder rates. Results: The non-inferiority of W-TENS was demonstrated in both the per protocol (PP) and intent-to-treat (ITT) populations. At M3, PI in PP population was 3.87 (2.12) compared with 4.66 (2.37) [delta: −0.79 (0.44); 95% CI (−1.65, 0.08)] in W-TENS and WO groups, respectively. A planned superiority analysis showed a significant superiority of W-TENS over WO on PI at M3 ( p = 0.0124). The number of TRAEs was significantly lower in the W-TENS group ( n = 7) than in the WO group ( n = 36) ( p < 0.001). Other secondary outcomes also favored W-TENS. Conclusion: W-TENS was more effective and better tolerated than WO in the treatment of chronic nociceptive KOA pain and offers an interesting non-pharmacological analgesic alternative in the management of KOA. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03902340
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".