Eidan Al-Zahrani
Prince Sultan Military Health College, Saudi Arabia
Title: Does the arrangement of the interferential current electrodes affect its efficacy on pain?
Biography
Biography: Eidan Al-Zahrani
Abstract
Background: Interferential current (IFC) is regularly used for musculoskeletal pain reduction. Th e use of IFC is based on minimizing
skin impedance and producing maximum stimulation at the point of intersection of the two alternating currents, deep in tissue.
However, previous systematic reviews found no clear reduction eff ect of pain with IFC. Recently, IFC was found to induce highest
voltage outside the intersection of the two currents but lowest voltage in the intersection spot. It is probably true that placing the
treated area outside the intersection spot of the currents would reveal a signifi cant pain reduction.
Materials & Methods: 31 (14 males and 17 females) with sub acute low back pain were assigned randomly to 1- external IFC
application (where the most tender spot was located between tow electrodes at 2 cm outside of the external borders of the electrodes)
or 2- placebo external IFC application and Comparatively 23 (9 males and 14 females) were also assigned to placebo external IFT.
Subjects were assessed for their pain before and aft er IFC session using the parameters such as visual analogue scale (VAS), pressure
pain threshold (PPT), pain distribution and range of motion (ROM).Subjects received 20 minutes of IFC at 100 Hz and comfortable
stimulation intensity.
Results: Th e independent sample t-test has been applied to compare the experimental and control groups with pre and post
measurements. Th e mean (SD) for experimental group is 42 (9.8) and for the control group is 44.8 (12.3). By using t-test signifi cant
diff erence (since P<0.05) was obtained for the parameters VAS and Pain distribution, which shows that the groups are having
diff erence both statistically and clinically. Th ere is an insignifi cant diff erence (since P>0.05) between two compared groups on pain
threshold. Th ough statistically insignifi cant on pain threshold there is acceptable clinical diff erence between the two groups.
Conclusion: Despite these limitations, the study fi ndings indicate that as a group, the fi ndings indicate that the location of the
electrodes does aff ect the treatment outcome on patients with sub acute low back pain on VAS and Pain distribution. However,
more sample size will be required to prove the signifi cant diff erence between the two groups on each parameter both clinically and
statistically. Interventions to increase the effi cacy of pain management in this population will be more helpful.