Analgesic effects of high-frequency and low-frequency TENS currents in patients with distal neuropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, diabetes mellitus (DM) is relevant problem, both for its prevalence and complications, including distal polyneuropathy (DPNP). At the same time, discussions continue on analgesic efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in DPNP. Aim of this study was to conduct a multi-faceted assessment of pain syndrome in these patients before and after TENS, taking into account levels of polyneuropathy, its severity and age of patients. The study was conducted in accordance with the research of the Federal State Budgetary Institution of the National Medical Research Center for Rehabilitation and Balneology of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (CTR No. 121040100062-3) and with the permission of the Local Ethics Committee (IRB No. 2 dated 14.01.2021). The study included 75 patients with DM type II with DPNP, which are distributed into 3 groups of 25 people: Group 1a, patients received high-frequency TENS (HF); Group Ib, patients received low-frequency TENS (LF); as control, Group C received a standard method of pharmacological therapy without physiotherapy. Intensity of DPNP was evaluated before and after the course of treatment using a visual analog scale (VAS), the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and a graphical linear analysis of pain on the neuropathic pain diagnostic questionnaire 4 (DN4) scale. TENS provides an analgesic effect that may exceed pharmacotherapy in terms of efficacy and safety. There was a 65.9% reduction in neuropathic pain according to VAS after a course of application, with the effects remaining up to 34% during the 6-month follow-up. HF TENS provided a higher significant analgesic effects than LF TENS, as it ensures the reduction of pain syndrome according to VAS by 25.8% (p <0.01), and total estimated characteristics - 35.5% (p <0.01), and touch - in at 58.1% (p = 0.001) and according to the scales of the MPQ (S) and DN4 - by 21% (p = 0.007). The observed differences in analgesic effects between HF TENS and LF TENS are based on analyses of pain in the immediate and long-term follow-up periods of type II DM patients with DPNP. These results, based on summation of the estimated parameters of the international pain scales support expectation of an expansion of the the use of analgesic TENS in aging patients suffering with DM of varying severity and extent of DPNP damage, a goal of great scientific and practical importance.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".