![](/images/graphics-bg.png)
Two Transcutaneous Stimulation Techniques in Shoulder Pain: Transcutaneous Pulsed Radiofrequency (TPRF) versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS): A Comparative Pilot Study
Joint Authors
Lin, Mu-Lien
Chiu, Hung-Wei
Shih, Zao-Ming
Lee, Po-Ying
Li, Pei-Zhi
Guo, Chin-Hong
Luo, Yuan-Jie
Lin, Shen-Chieh
Lin, Kwan-Yu
Hsu, Yu-Ming
Pang, Angela
Pang, Weiwu
Source
Issue
Vol. 2019, Issue 2019 (31 Dec. 2019), pp.1-9, 9 p.
Publisher
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Publication Date
2019-02-04
Country of Publication
Egypt
No. of Pages
9
Main Subjects
Abstract EN
Objective.
To compare the safety and efficacy of 2 transcutaneous stimulation techniques, transcutaneous pulsed radiofrequency (TPRF) versus transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), in chronic shoulder tendonitis.
Design.
A prospective, randomized, and double-blind clinical trial.
Setting.
Academic pain service of a city hospital.
Subjects.
Fifty patients with sonography-confirmed shoulder tendonitis.
Methods.
Fifty patients were randomly allocated into two groups for electrical stimulation treatment with 3-month follow-ups: Group 1 n=25, TENS and Group 2 n=25, TPRF.
Both groups underwent either treatment for 15 minutes every other day, three times total.
Our primary goals were to find any treatment comfort level, adverse event, and changes in Constant–Murley shoulder (CMS) scores.
The secondary goals were finding the changes in pain, enjoyment of life, and general activity (PEG) scores.
Results.
For primary goals, no adverse events were noted throughout this study.
No differences were found between groups for treatment tolerability (3.20 + 0.87 vs.
2.16 + 0.75).
Statistically significant lower PEG scores were noticeable with the TPRF group after the course (12.73 + 5.79 vs.
24.53 + 10.21, p=0.013).
Their statistical significance lasted for 3 months although the difference gap diminished after 1 month.
CMS scores were significantly higher in the TPRF group (70.84 + 6.74 vs.
59.56 + 9.49, p=0.007) right after treatment course but the significance did not last.
Conclusions.
In treating chronic shoulder tendinitis using two transcutaneous stimulation techniques, both TPRF and TENS are safe and effective.
TPRF is superior to TENS.
American Psychological Association (APA)
Lin, Mu-Lien& Chiu, Hung-Wei& Shih, Zao-Ming& Lee, Po-Ying& Li, Pei-Zhi& Guo, Chin-Hong…[et al.]. 2019. Two Transcutaneous Stimulation Techniques in Shoulder Pain: Transcutaneous Pulsed Radiofrequency (TPRF) versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS): A Comparative Pilot Study. Pain Research and Management،Vol. 2019, no. 2019, pp.1-9.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1207239
Modern Language Association (MLA)
Lin, Mu-Lien…[et al.]. Two Transcutaneous Stimulation Techniques in Shoulder Pain: Transcutaneous Pulsed Radiofrequency (TPRF) versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS): A Comparative Pilot Study. Pain Research and Management No. 2019 (2019), pp.1-9.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1207239
American Medical Association (AMA)
Lin, Mu-Lien& Chiu, Hung-Wei& Shih, Zao-Ming& Lee, Po-Ying& Li, Pei-Zhi& Guo, Chin-Hong…[et al.]. Two Transcutaneous Stimulation Techniques in Shoulder Pain: Transcutaneous Pulsed Radiofrequency (TPRF) versus Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS): A Comparative Pilot Study. Pain Research and Management. 2019. Vol. 2019, no. 2019, pp.1-9.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1207239
Data Type
Journal Articles
Language
English
Notes
Includes bibliographical references
Record ID
BIM-1207239