2011
DOI: 10.1002/art.30258
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effectiveness of pulsed electrical stimulation in the management of osteoarthritis of the knee: Results of a double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled, repeated‐measures trial

Abstract: Objective. To determine the effectiveness of subsensory, pulsed electrical stimulation (PES) in the symptomatic management of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.Methods. This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, repeated-measures trial in 70 participants with clinical and radiographically diagnosed OA of the knee who were randomized to either PES or placebo. Conclusion. In this sample of subjects with mildto-moderate symptoms and moderate-to-severe radiographic OA of the knee, 26 weeks of PES was n… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
17
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
(46 reference statements)
1
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, Fary et al (42) found that these changes could be sustained for at least 16 weeks. Discordant with previous studies, Fary et al (44) found no increased effectiveness of PES (100Hz, 4ms, 7 hours a day for 26 weeks) compared to placebo in pain, physical function, stiffness, lifge quality and exercise. The authors note that the sample may not be representative of the OA population, due to its characteristics.…”
Section: Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulationsupporting
confidence: 71%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, Fary et al (42) found that these changes could be sustained for at least 16 weeks. Discordant with previous studies, Fary et al (44) found no increased effectiveness of PES (100Hz, 4ms, 7 hours a day for 26 weeks) compared to placebo in pain, physical function, stiffness, lifge quality and exercise. The authors note that the sample may not be representative of the OA population, due to its characteristics.…”
Section: Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulationsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…Three studies examined the effectiveness of pulsed electrical stimulation (PES) in the perception of pain and self-reported health status in patients with knee OA (42,43,44). Two studies (42,43) verified efficiency of PES in pain, physical function, stiffness and selfreported health status of the patient, using the following parameters: 100Hz, 2ms, subsensorial intensity for more than 6 hours/day.…”
Section: Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Only 8% (6 of 75) of trials with late dropouts used MMRM to analyze longitudinal outcome data. Additionally, MMRM was performed after imputation of missing values using LOCF in two trials [49,50], BOCF in one trial [51], and MI in another one [48]. The use of imputations such as LOCF and BOCF undermines the benefits of MMRM, and the results may not be valid under MAR.…”
Section: Handling Missing Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other small studies have essentially confirmed the findings of the 2009 Cochrane review group. The first of these studies was published in Arthritis and Rheumatism and examined the effect of pulsed electrical stimulation versus placebo on pain (Visual Analog Scale), function, and joint stiffness measures of the WOMAC and quality of life (SF-36) in patients with knee OA [10]. This study found no added benefit of electrical stimulation on pain or function compared with the placebo group.…”
Section: Electrical Stimulationmentioning
confidence: 99%