Transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) for cancer pain in adults

Pain in breast cancer treatment: aggravating factors and coping mechanisms

The objective of this study was to evaluate pain in women with breast cancer-related lymphedema and the characteristics of aggravating factors and coping mechanisms. The study was conducted in the Clinica Godoy, São Jose do Rio Preto, with a group of 46 women who had undergone surgery for the treatment of breast cancer. The following variables were evaluated: type and length of surgery; number of radiotherapy and chemotherapy sessions; continued feeling of the removed breast (phantom limb), infection, intensity of pain, and factors that improve and worsen the pain. The percentage of events was used for statistical analysis. About half the participants (52.1%) performed modified radical surgery, with 91.3% removing only one breast; 82.6% of the participants did not perform breast reconstruction surgery. Insignificant pain was reported by 32.60% of the women and 67.3% said they suffered pain; it was mild in 28.8% of the cases (scale 1–5), moderate in 34.8% (scale 6–9), and severe in 4.3%. The main mechanisms used to cope with pain were painkillers in 41.30% of participants, rest in 21.73%, religious ceremonies in 17.39%, and chatting with friends in 8.69%. In conclusion, many mastectomized patients with lymphedema complain of pain, but pain is often underrecognized and undertreated.

Integrating acupuncture into cancer care

Oncology acupuncture has become a new and promising field of research because more and more cancer patients have sought non-pharmacological alternatives for symptom management. While different mechanisms have been proposed to explain its efficacy, including theories of the neural system, endocrine cytokine or immunological regulation, its eventual role has become that of alleviating the side effects induced by chemotherapy or radiotherapy. In this paper, we have reviewed the related articles focusing on acupuncture mechanisms and applications in cancer care to provide a quick sketch of acupuncture in cancer care. A detailed search was performed to identify the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews on acupuncture in oncology, using PUBMED and Cochrane. The search terms included: Acupuncture, acupressure, and cancer. Additional terms were used to target specific symptoms (i.e., breast cancer, hot flash, xerostomia, nausea, vomiting, cancer pain, insomnia, fatigue). Two authors independently extracted data for analysis and review. Ultimately, 25 articles underwent full-text review. Recent trials made efforts in studying (a) hot flashes in breast cancer, (b) xerostomia induced by radiotherapy in head and neck cancer, (c) nausea and vomiting post-chemotherapy, (d) cancer pain, and (e) fatigue and insomnia in cancer patients. Controversial results for acupuncture application in cancer care appeared in different categories, but a trend emerged that acupuncture can palliate cancer-related symptoms. The research to date certainly offers us a valid complementary therapy in treating cancer-related symptoms. Meanwhile, practical strategies with safe measures for enhancing the efficacy are needed in further interventions, as well as continuing research with a validated methodology.

Role of rehabilitation medicine and physical agents in the treatment of cancer-associated pain

PURPOSE

To provide an overview of rehabilitation medicine- and physical modality-based approaches to cancer pain management, and to highlight the fact that these approaches are generally used in conjunction and that a majority are focused on minimizing pain during periods of mobility and the performance of activities of daily living.

METHODS

We performed a nonsystematic literature review and provide a description of the current standard of care.

RESULTS

Rehabilitative and physical modalities used to manage pain can be grouped into four categories: those that modulate nociception, stabilize or unload painful structures, influence physiological processes that indirectly influence nociception, or alleviate pain arising from the overloading of muscles and connective tissues that often occurs after surgery or with sarcopenia in late-stage cancer. Most modalities have been pragmatically refined over the years, and many have an evidence base, although few have been explicitly validated in the oncologic setting. With few exceptions, they are patient controlled and free of adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

Physical modalities and rehabilitation medicine offer a range of pain management approaches that may serve as beneficial adjuncts to the conventional systemic and interventional analgesic strategies used to control cancer-related pain. These approaches may be particularly beneficial to patients with movement-associated pain and those who are ambivalent regarding pharmacoanalgesia.

A survey of the attitudes and beliefs about the use of TENS for pain management by physiotherapists working in two cities in Sri Lanka

INTRODUCTION

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a noninvasive, inexpensive, self-administered technique used throughout the world to relieve pain. In Sri Lanka, physiotherapists may use TENS for their patients as they receive a small amount of education about the principles and practice of TENS in their undergraduate training. To date, there have been no data gathered about the use of TENS by physiotherapists in Sri Lanka. The aim of this study was to assess attitudes and beliefs of physiotherapists working in Sri Lanka about their use of TENS for pain management.

METHODS

A postal survey was undertaken using a 12-item questionnaire developed by the investigators to gather information about attitudes, beliefs and use of TENS in clinical practice. The questionnaire was distributed to 100 physiotherapists working in three government hospitals and six private hospitals in the cities of Kandy and Colombo. A descriptive analysis of data was performed.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven completed questionnaires were returned (67% response rate). Over half of the respondents (58.2%) reported that they used TENS to treat pain "often" or "very often", with use for musculoskeletal/orthopedic (61.3%) and neuropathic/neuralgic (79.1%) pain being most common. TENS was used less for postsurgical pain and rarely for cancer pain. Most (95.5%) respondents reported that their patients benefitted "considerably" from TENS. 76.1% of the respondents reported that they did not recommend and/or prescribe TENS for patients to use at home.

CONCLUSION

Physiotherapists value TENS as a treatment option to manage musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain. However, there is a need for systems and resources to enable to patients to self-administer TENS rather than having to visit clinics.

Pain in cancer survivors

Pain is a common problem in cancer survivors, especially in the first few years after treatment. In the longer term, approximately 5% to 10% of survivors have chronic severe pain that interferes with functioning. The prevalence is much higher in certain subpopulations, such as breast cancer survivors. All cancer treatment modalities have the potential to cause pain. Currently, the approach to managing pain in cancer survivors is similar to that for chronic cancer-related pain, pharmacotherapy being the principal treatment modality. Although it may be appropriate to continue strong opioids in survivors with moderate to severe pain, most pain problems in cancer survivors will not require them. Moreover, because more than 40% of cancer survivors now live longer than 10 years, there is growing concern about the long-term adverse effects of opioids and the risks of misuse, abuse, and overdose in the nonpatient population. As with chronic nonmalignant pain, multimodal interventions that incorporate nonpharmacologic therapies should be part of the treatment strategy for pain in cancer survivors, prescribed with the aim of restoring functionality, not just providing comfort. For patients with complex pain issues, multidisciplinary programs should be used, if available. New or worsening pain in a cancer survivor must be evaluated to determine whether the cause is recurrent disease or a second malignancy. This article focuses on patients with a history of cancer who are beyond the acute diagnosis and treatment phase and on common treatment-related pain etiologies. The benefits and harms of the various pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic options for pain management in this setting are reviewed.

A systematic review: non-pharmacological interventions in treating pain in patients with advanced cancer

AIMS

To assess and synthesize the evidence of the effects and safety of non-pharmacological interventions in treating pain in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common symptom experienced by patients with advanced cancer; the treatment of such pain is often suboptimal. To manage it, non-pharmacological interventions are recommended after pharmacological treatments have been re-evaluated and modified. However, there remains a lack of knowledge about the effects and safety of such interventions.

DESIGN

A systematic review was conducted based on the procedure of the Centre of Reviews and Dissemination.

DATA SOURCES

Research papers published between 2000-2013 were identified from the following databases: CINAHL, MEDIC, MEDLINE (Ovid) and PsycINFO. The references in the selected studies were searched manually.

REVIEW METHODS

The studies selected were reviewed for quality, using Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group risk of bias assessment criteria.

RESULTS

There was limited evidence that some of the non-pharmacological interventions were promising with respect to reducing cancer pain. Relatively, few adverse events were reported as a result of using such interventions.

CONCLUSION

It was not possible to draw conclusions about the effects and safety of the non-pharmacological interventions in reducing cancer pain. Some interventions showed promising short-term effects, but there is a need for more rigorous trials. Qualitative studies are required to collect information about patients' perceptions. There are several research gaps: we found no studies about music, spiritual care, hypnosis, active coping training, cold or ultrasonic stimulation.

Complementary and alternative medicine for cancer pain: an overview of systematic reviews

Background and Objective. Now with more and more published systematic reviews of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) on adult cancer pain, it is necessary to use the methods of overview of systematic review to summarize available evidence, appraise the evidence level, and give suggestions to future research and practice. Methods. A comprehensive search (the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and ISI Web of Knowledge) was conducted to identify all systematic reviews or meta-analyses of CAM on adult cancer pain. And the evidence levels were evaluated using GRADE approach. Results. 27 systematic reviews were included. Based on available evidence, we could find that psychoeducational interventions, music interventions, acupuncture plus drug therapy, Chinese herbal medicine plus cancer therapy, compound kushen injection, reflexology, lycopene, TENS, qigong, cupping, cannabis, Reiki, homeopathy (Traumeel), and creative arts therapies might have beneficial effects on adult cancer pain. No benefits were found for acupuncture (versus drug therapy or shame acupuncture), and the results were inconsistent for massage therapy, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS), and Viscum album L plus cancer treatment. However, the evidence levels for these interventions were low or moderate due to high risk of bias and/or small sample size of primary studies. Conclusion. CAM may be beneficial for alleviating cancer pain, but the evidence levels were found to be low or moderate. Future large and rigor randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm the benefits of CAM on adult cancer pain.

Electrocortical Analysis of Patients with Intercostobrachial Pain Treated with TENS after Breast Cancer Surgery

[Purpose] Among the physical therapeutic procedures to decrease pain, there is transcutaneous electrical neural stimulation (TENS). There is no consensus about its efficacy for oncological patients, especially for post-mastectomy pain and eletrocortical changes in somatosensory areas. The aim of this study was to analyze acute electrocortical changes after TENS treatment of patients with intercostobrachial post mastectomy pain. [Subjects] Eighteen patients were divided into acupuncture (A) and burst (B) group. [Methods] In this pre and post-intervention study each group was measured for EEG analysis in absulte power in alpha band (8-14 Hz). Outcomes variables were the alpha waveband in the sensorymotor cortex and pain pre-and-post TENS intervention. Data were analyzed using ANOVA to compare times (rest, 10 and 15 min), group and electrodes. Pain was analyzed using percentual pain evaluation (PPE) in both groups. [Results] Outcomes indicate main effects of time and electrodes because of slow (8-10 Hz) and fast alpha (10-12 Hz) wavebands decreased. PPE reduced 88.4% in A and 66.3% in G. [Conclusion] TENS promoted electrical modification in the parietal region and a decrease in pain. Future studies should investigate other wave must be proposed for other bands and use different methods of EEG analysis to elucidate the actual mechanisms behind the efficacy of TENS treatment.

Neuromodulation of chronic headaches: position statement from the European Headache Federation

The medical treatment of patients with chronic primary headache syndromes (chronic migraine, chronic tension-type headache, chronic cluster headache, hemicrania continua) is challenging as serious side effects frequently complicate the course of medical treatment and some patients may be even medically intractable. When a definitive lack of responsiveness to conservative treatments is ascertained and medication overuse headache is excluded, neuromodulation options can be considered in selected cases. Here, the various invasive and non-invasive approaches, such as hypothalamic deep brain stimulation, occipital nerve stimulation, stimulation of sphenopalatine ganglion, cervical spinal cord stimulation, vagus nerve stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation are extensively published although proper RCT-based evidence is limited. The European Headache Federation herewith provides a consensus statement on the clinical use of neuromodulation in headache, based on theoretical background, clinical data, and side effect of each method. This international consensus further gives recommendations for future studies on these new approaches. In spite of a growing field of stimulation devices in headaches treatment, further controlled studies to validate, strengthen and disseminate the use of neurostimulation are clearly warranted. Consequently, until these data are available any neurostimulation device should only be used in patients with medically intractable syndromes from tertiary headache centers either as part of a valid study or have shown to be effective in such controlled studies with an acceptable side effect profile.

What makes transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation work? Making sense of the mixed results in the clinical literature

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a nonpharmacological treatment for control of pain. It has come under much scrutiny lately with the Center for Medicare Services rendering a recent decision stating that "TENS is not reasonable and necessary for the treatment of CLBP [chronic low back pain]." When reading and analyzing the existing literature for which systematic reviews show that TENS is inconclusive or ineffective, it is clear that a number of variables related to TENS application have not been considered. Although many of the trials were designed with the highest of standards, recent evidence suggests that factors related to TENS application need to be considered in an assessment of efficacy. These factors include dosing of TENS, negative interactions with long-term opioid use, the population and outcome assessed, timing of outcome measurement, and comparison groups. The purpose of this perspective is to highlight and interpret recent evidence to help improve the design of clinical trials and the efficacy of TENS in the clinical setting.

Spinal cord stimulation for cancer-related pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related pain places a heavy burden on public health with related high expenditure. Severe pain is associated with a decreased quality of life in patients with cancer. A significant proportion of patients with cancer-related pain are under-treated.There is a need for more effective control of cancer-related pain. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) may have a role in pain management. The effectiveness and safety of SCS for patients with cancer-related pain is currently unknown.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of SCS for cancer-related pain compared with standard care using conventional analgesic medication. We also appraised risk and potential adverse events associated with the use of SCS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following bibliographic databases in order to identify relevant studies: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Libary (from inception to 2012, Issue 6); MEDLINE; EMBASE; and CBM (Chinese Biomedical Database) (from inception to July, 2012). We also handsearched relevant journals.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that directly compared SCS with other interventions with regards to the effectiveness of pain management. We also planned to include cross-over trials that compared SCS with another treatment. We planned to identify non-randomised controlled trials but these would only be included if no RCTs could be found.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The initial search strategy yielded 430 articles. By scrutinising titles and abstracts, we found 412 articles irrelevant to the analytical purpose of this systematic review due to different scopes of diseases or different methods of intervention (intrathecal infusion system; oral medication) or aims other than pain control (spinal cord function monitoring, bladder function restoration or amelioration of organ metabolism). The remaining 18 trials were reviewed as full manuscripts. No RCTs were identified. Fourteen sporadic case reports and review articles were excluded and four before-and-after case series studies (92 participants) were included. Two review authors independently selected the studies to be included in the review according to the pre-specified eligibility criteria. A checklist for methodological quality of non-randomised controlled trials was used (STROBE checklist) and all review authors discussed and agreed on the inclusion of trials and the results of the quality assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

Four before-and-after case series studies (a total of 92 participants) met our criteria for inclusion. All included trials adopted a visual analogue scale (VAS) to evaluate pain relief. Heterogeneity existed in terms of baseline characteristics, electrode and stimulator parameters, level of implantation and route of implantation; data reporting was different among all trials. In two trials, pain relief was achieved in 76% (48/63) of patients at the end of the follow-up period. In the third trial, pre-procedure VAS was 6 to 9 (mean 7.43 ); the one-month post-implant VAS was 2 to 4 (mean 3.07); the 12-month post-implant VAS was 1 to 3 (mean 2.67). In the fourth trial, the pre-procedure VAS was 6 to 9 (mean 7.07); 1 to 4 (mean 2.67) at one-month; 1 to 4 (mean 1.87) at 12 months. Analgesic use was largely reduced. The main adverse events were infection of sites of implantation, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage, pain at the sites of electrodes, dislodgement of the electrodes and system failure, however, the incidence in patients with cancer could not be calculated. Since all trials were non-randomised controlled trials, they carried risk of all types of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence is insufficient to establish the role of SCS in treating refractory cancer-related pain. Future randomised studies should focus on the implantation of SCS in patients with cancer-related pain.

The use of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in a major cancer center for the treatment of severe cancer-related pain and associated disability

BACKGROUND

Cancer pain is difficult to treat, often requiring a multimodal approach. While medication management remains the mainstay for the treatment of cancer pain, medications are often associated with undesired side effects. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) provides a potential adjunctive method for treating cancer pain with minimal side effects.

OBJECTIVE

Few studies have been performed evaluating the efficacy of TENS on cancer pain. We sought to examine the usefulness of TENS on all cancer patients and to specifically look at the use of TENS as a goal-directed therapy to improve functionality.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

Since 2008, patients with chronic cancer pain and on multimodal pain regimens were trialed with TENS. Those patients who showed an improvement in pain symptoms or severity were educated about and provided with a TENS unit for use at home. Pain symptoms and scores were monitored with the visual analog scale (VAS), the numerical rating pain (NRP) scale, and Short-Form McGill Questionnaire at the start of TENS treatment and at 2 months follow-up.

RESULTS

TENS proved beneficial in 69.7% of patients over the course of 2 months. In TENS responsive patients, VAS scores decreased by 9.8 on a 0-100 mm scale (P < 0.001), and NRP scores decreased by 0.8 on a 1-10 scale (P < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

Lack of placebo and lack of blinding of physician and patient.

CONCLUSIONS

TENS provides a beneficial adjunct for the treatment of cancer pain, especially when utilized as a goal-directed therapy.