Therapeutic ultrasound for chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2014. Chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP) has become one of the main causes of disability in the adult population around the world. Although therapeutic ultrasound is not recommended in recent clinical guidelines, it is frequently used by physiotherapists in the treatment of chronic LBP. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to determine the effectiveness of therapeutic ultrasound in the management of chronic non-specific LBP. A secondary objective was to determine the most effective dosage and intensity of therapeutic ultrasound for chronic LBP. SEARCH METHODS: We performed electronic searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro, Index to Chiropractic Literature, and two trials registers to 7 January 2020. We checked the reference lists of eligible studies and relevant systematic reviews and performed forward citation searching. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on therapeutic ultrasound for chronic non-specific LBP. We compared ultrasound (either alone or in combination with another treatment) with placebo or other interventions for chronic LBP. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of each trial and extracted the data. We performed a meta-analysis when sufficient clinical and statistical homogeneity existed. We determined the certainty of the evidence for each comparison using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 RCTs involving a total of 1025 participants with chronic LBP. The included studies were carried out in secondary care settings in Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Croatia, the UK, and the USA, and most applied therapeutic ultrasound in addition to another treatment, for six to 18 treatment sessions. The risk of bias was unclear in most studies. Eight studies (80%) had unclear or high risk of selection bias; no studies blinded care providers to the intervention; and only five studies (50%) blinded participants. There was a risk of selective reporting in eight studies (80%), and no studies adequately assessed compliance with the intervention. There was very low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision, inconsistency, and limitations in design) of little to no difference between therapeutic ultrasound and placebo for short-term pain improvement (mean difference (MD) -7.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -17.99 to 3.75; n = 121, 3 RCTs; 0-to-100-point visual analogue scale (VAS)). There was also moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision) of little to no difference in the number of participants achieving a 30% reduction in pain in the short term (risk ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.44; n = 225, 1 RCT). There was low-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision and limitations in design) that therapeutic ultrasound has a small effect on back-specific function compared with placebo in the short term (standardised mean difference -0.29, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.07 (MD -1.07, 95% CI -1.89 to -0.26; Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire); n = 325; 4 RCTs), but this effect does not appear to be clinically important. There was moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for imprecision) of little to no difference between therapeutic ultrasound and placebo on well-being (MD -2.71, 95% CI -9.85 to 4.44; n = 267, 2 RCTs; general health subscale of the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36)). Two studies (n = 486) reported on overall improvement and satisfaction between groups, and both reported little to no difference between groups (low-certainty evidence, downgraded for serious imprecision). One study (n = 225) reported on adverse events and did not identify any adverse events related to the intervention (low-certainty evidence, downgraded for serious imprecision). No study reported on disability for this comparison. We do not know whether therapeutic ultrasound in addition to exercise results in better outcomes than exercise alone because the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was very low (downgraded for imprecision and serious limitations in design). The estimate effect for pain was in favour of the ultrasound plus exercise group (MD -21.1, 95% CI -27.6 to -14.5; n = 70, 2 RCTs; 0-to-100-point VAS) at short term. Regarding back-specific function (MD - 0.41, 95% CI -3.14 to 2.32; n = 79, 2 RCTs; Oswestry Disability Questionnaire) and well-being (MD -2.50, 95% CI -9.53 to 4.53; n = 79, 2 RCTs; general health subscale of the SF-36), there was little to no difference between groups at short term. No studies reported on the number of participants achieving a 30% reduction in pain, patient satisfaction, disability, or adverse events for this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence from this systematic review is uncertain regarding the effect of therapeutic ultrasound on pain in individuals with chronic non-specific LBP. Whilst there is some evidence that therapeutic ultrasound may have a small effect on improving low back function in the short term compared to placebo, the certainty of evidence is very low. The true effect is likely to be substantially different. There are few high-quality randomised trials, and the available trials were very small. The current evidence does not support the use of therapeutic ultrasound in the management of chronic LBP.

Continuous shortwave diathermy with exercise reduces pain and improves function in Lateral Epicondylitis more than sham diathermy: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Lateral epicondylitis or tennis elbow, causes significant pain and disability in the upper extremity. Conservative approaches include using thermal and electrical agents. The aim of this study was to explore the effectiveness of shortwave diathermy on pain, function and grip strength of patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis. A randomized placebo-controlled design with concealed allocation, assessor blinding and intention-to-treat analysis was conducted. METHODS: Fifty patients suffering from lateral epicondylitis for more than 3 months, without any systemic diseases or history of other pathologies, were divided into two groups. In both groups, the patients were instructed to perform specific stretching and strengthening exercises. In addition, the patients in the experimental group, received 15 min of 40-60 W, continuous short wave diathermy while sham diathermy was applied for the control group. The primary outcome measure was pain and the secondary outcome measures were functional ability and pain free grip strength. Outcomes were assessed at the base line, after the 5th and the 10th session of treatment as well as after 3 months. RESULTS: Mixed ANOVA analysis showed significant improvement in both groups. Meanwhile, there was a significant interaction effect of time and group on all outcome measures implying the greater improvement in pain, function and grip strength in the group receiving real diathermy. CONCLUSIONS: Adding continuous short wave diathermy to a specific regimen of exercises, reduces pain and improves function in patients suffering from chronic lateral epicondylitis more than sham diathermy and exercise. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRCT2016042321139N4.

Adding high-frequency transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation to the first phase of post anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction rehabilitation does not improve pain and function in young male athletes more than exercise alone: a randomized single-blind clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Knee ligamentous trauma and the following pain is one of the most prevalent athletic injuries. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is one of the conservative approaches in controlling pain which is low cost, noninvasive, and safe with low complications. Our purpose was to study whether transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) could help athletes perform better during the first phase of rehabilitation (0-4 weeks) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery and until the follow-up. METHODS: This randomized single blind (exercise instructor and assessor) clinical trial was performed on 70 male athletes, undergone ACL surgery. After the surgery, patients were randomly divided into two groups: the first group received semi-supervised exercise plus high-frequency TENSTENS for 35 min a day and the second group only performed exercises. Treatment duration continued for 20 sessions, 4 weeks. The visual analog scale (VAS) score (100 mm), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) questionnaire and knee flexion Range of motion (ROM) were evaluated for all patients after the surgery (before commencing the rehabilitation program), after 4 weeks and 14 weeks from the surgery. RESULTS: Mixed ANOVA was used to explore the interaction effects of time and group on outcome measures and post hoc additional tests were performed on the data. The VAS, IKDC questionnaire score and knee flexion ROM increased in both groups over time, but the amount of improvement did not differ between the two groups, implying no additional improvement in the group receiving TENS along with exercises. CONCLUSION: The findings of the present trial shows that adding TENS to a specific protocol of semi-supervised exercise in the first phase of rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction is not efficient on improving knee function and pain more than exercise alone. Implications for Rehabilitation Injury to the anterior cruciate ligament of the knee is a common injury specifically in athletes. Incorporating effective pain relieving strategies during the post anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery rehabilitation could lead to improvement in regaining the range of motion and function of the knee which is of crucial importance after the surgery. Applying transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation alongside a specific protocol of semi-supervised exercise in the first phase of rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction did not have any additional effect to exercise alone.

No immediate analgesic effect of diadynamic current in patients with nonspecific low back pain in comparison to TENS.

BACKGROUND AND DESIGN: Chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP) has major socioeconomic as well as personal impact in many industrialized and developing countries. Physiotherapy is a common intervention for this group of patients and using anti-pain physical modalities is a common part of the physical therapy. In a randomized controlled trial we investigated the immediate effect of the Diadynamic current in comparison to TENS on reducing the pain in patients suffering from non specific chronic low back pain. METHODS: Thirty patients were randomized into the Diadynamic current and TENS groups. Electrical stimulation was applied for 10 min in the Diadynamic group and for 15 min in the TENS group for one session. Pain, on a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale, and Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT), using an Algometer, was measured before the treatment, after the current application, 20 min later and after 48 h. RESULTS: Pain was decreased significantly after 20 min following the current application only in the TENS group, with no improvement at all measurement points in the group receiving Diadynamic current. PPT was increased immediately after current application in both groups but did not last until later measurements. CONCLUSION: Diadynamic current had no positive effect on prompt relief of pain in patients suffering from recurrent CNSLBP.

Does ultrasound therapy add to the effects of exercise and mobilization in frozen shoulder? A pilot randomized double-blind clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study intended to determine the extent to which Ultrasound could add to the effects of exercise and manual therapy in the rehabilitation treatment of primary adhesive capsulitis. DESIGN: A pilot double blind randomized clinical trial was carried out on 50 patients suffering from primary adhesive capsulitis. Intervention included continuous 3 MHz, 1.5 w/cm2 Ultrasound, applied for the first group and sham Ultrasound for the second group. In addition specific stretching and strengthening exercises as well as glenohumeral joint mobilization were delivered to both groups. Pain (VAS), functional ability (using Oxford Shoulder Score) and shoulder range of motion were assessed at the baseline, after 10 sessions of treatment, and at 3 months follow-up. An intention to treat Mixed ANOVA analysis was performed to explore the interaction effects of time and group on outcome measures. RESULTS: No significant interaction effect of time and group was seen on pain, function and Range of Motion (p > 0.05), meaning that the amount of improvement in all outcome measures were alike in the two groups. CONCLUSION: Applying continuous Ultrasound along with a regimen of semi supervised exercise and mobilization in patients with primary adhesive capsulitis did not have any additional effect to the placebo Ultrasound, on outcome measures. Larger scale studies are needed to confirm the findings.

Therapeutic ultrasound for chronic low-back pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic non-specific low-back pain (LBP) has become one of the main causes of disability in the adult population around the world. Therapeutic ultrasound is frequently used by physiotherapists in the treatment of LBP and is one of the most widely used electro-physical agents in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review is to determine the effectiveness of therapeutic ultrasound in the management of chronic non-specific LBP. SEARCH METHODS: Electronic searches were performed using CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, and PsycLIT databases in October 2013. Reference lists of eligible studies and relevant systematic reviews were checked and forward citation searching was also performed. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials on therapeutic ultrasound for non-specific chronic LBP were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of each trial and extracted the data. When sufficient clinical and statistical homogeneity existed, a meta-analysis was performed. The quality of the evidence for each comparison was determined using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Seven small randomised controlled trials involving a total of 362 participants with chronic LBP were included. Two of the studies had a low risk of bias, meeting six or more of the 12 criteria used for assessing risk of bias. All studies were carried out in secondary care settings and most applied therapeutic ultrasound in addition to exercise therapy, at various intensities for six to 18 treatment sessions. There was moderate quality evidence that therapeutic ultrasound improves back-specific function (standardised mean difference (SMD) [95%CI] -0.45 [-0.84 to -0.05]) compared with placebo in the short term. There was low quality evidence that therapeutic ultrasound is no better than placebo for short-term pain improvement (mean difference (MD) [95%CI] -7.12 [-17.99 to 3.75]; zero to100-point scale). There was low quality evidence that therapeutic ultrasound plus exercise is no better than exercise alone for short-term pain improvement (MD [95%CI] -2.16 [-4.66 to 0.34]; zero to 50-point scale), or functional disability (MD [95%CI] -0.41 [-3.14 to 2.32]; per cent). The studies comparing therapeutic ultrasound versus placebo or versus exercise alone did not report on overall satisfaction with treatment, or quality of life. There was low quality evidence that spinal manipulation reduces pain and functional disability more than ultrasound over the short to medium term. There is also very low quality evidence that there is no clear benefit on any outcome measure between electrical stimulation and therapeutic ultrasound; and that phonophoresis results in improved SF-36 scores compared to therapeutic ultrasound. None of the included studies reported on adverse events related to the application of therapeutic ultrasound. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No high quality evidence was found to support the use of ultrasound for improving pain or quality of life in patients with non-specific chronic LBP. There is some evidence that therapeutic ultrasound has a small effect on improving low-back function in the short term, but this benefit is unlikely to be clinically important. Evidence from comparisons between other treatments and therapeutic ultrasound for chronic LBP were indeterminate and generally of low quality. Since there are few high quality randomised trials and the available trials are very small, future large trials with valid methodology are likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.