Scholarlink

Purpose of Review <p>The present investigation assesses efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on relief of cancer or chemotherapy-related pain. Patients with cancer experience a relatively high prevalence of pain that is reportedly undertreated. Therefore, this analysis is pertinent to determine if TENS is a useful complementary therapy considering its increase in accessibility and minimal side effect profile.</p> Recent Findings <p>A systematic search for eligible studies from PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and Embase was performed. The present investigation elucidated any significant differences between change in numeric rating scale of average and maximum pain scores between a TENS and non-TENS group. A nonsignificant difference was reported between TENS and non-TENS, with a mean difference of − 0.393 (95% CI − 1.780, 0.993; <i>P</i> = 0.578). For change in maximum pain reported, a nonsignificant difference was also found, with a mean difference of 0.128 (95% CI − 1.158, 1.414; <i>P</i> = 0.845).</p> Conclusion <p>Related to various limitations of this meta-analysis, no definitive conclusions could be concluded regarding efficacy of TENS in the treatment of cancer or chemotherapy-related pain. Additional randomized primary studies with standardized treatment protocols and pain measurements are needed for future meta-analysis and recommendations for clinical practice.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Efficacy of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Management of Cancer Pain: a Meta Analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月4日

查看全文
  • Alan D. Kaye,
  • Kaitlyn E. Allen,
  • Shivam S. Shah,
  • Summer A. Smith,
  • Taylor R. Plaisance,
  • Amy E. Brouillette,
  • Dani’elle J Despanie,
  • Tayler D. Payton,
  • Ross Rieger,
  • Naina Singh,
  • Shahab Ahmadzadeh,
  • Sonja Gennuso,
  • Sahar Shekoohi

摘要

Purpose of Review

The present investigation assesses efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on relief of cancer or chemotherapy-related pain. Patients with cancer experience a relatively high prevalence of pain that is reportedly undertreated. Therefore, this analysis is pertinent to determine if TENS is a useful complementary therapy considering its increase in accessibility and minimal side effect profile.

Recent Findings

A systematic search for eligible studies from PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and Embase was performed. The present investigation elucidated any significant differences between change in numeric rating scale of average and maximum pain scores between a TENS and non-TENS group. A nonsignificant difference was reported between TENS and non-TENS, with a mean difference of − 0.393 (95% CI − 1.780, 0.993; P = 0.578). For change in maximum pain reported, a nonsignificant difference was also found, with a mean difference of 0.128 (95% CI − 1.158, 1.414; P = 0.845).

Conclusion

Related to various limitations of this meta-analysis, no definitive conclusions could be concluded regarding efficacy of TENS in the treatment of cancer or chemotherapy-related pain. Additional randomized primary studies with standardized treatment protocols and pain measurements are needed for future meta-analysis and recommendations for clinical practice.