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

Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation for cancer-related pain management in patients receiving chronic opioid therapy: a randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

The opioid crisis resulting from its use disorder and overdose poses additional challenges for cancer pain management. The American Society of Clinical Oncology Practice Guideline recommends acupuncture therapy for the management of adult cancer-related pain (CRP), but the effectiveness of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS) on CRP remains uncertain.

METHODS

This 5-week prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted at 2 hospitals in China, and participants with CRP receiving chronic opioid therapy were randomized 1:1 into two groups between December 2014 and June 2018. The true TEAS group underwent 15 sessions of TEAS treatments over 3 consecutive weeks, while the control group received sham stimulation. The primary outcome was the numerical rating scale (NRS) score in the past 24h at week 3. The secondary outcomes included morphine equivalent daily dose, quality of life and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 159 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. The baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. The mean NRS scores were 0.98 points at week 3 in the true TEAS group and 1.41 points in the sham group, with the mean difference between groups of -0.43 points (P < 0.001; OR = 0.68, P < 0.05). The proportion of patients with NRS reduction more than thirty percentage at week 3 was 50.00% in the true TEAS group and 35.44% in the sham group (RD = 0.15, P > 0.05; RR = 1.41, P > 0.05). No significant difference in pain intensity between the two groups was observed during the follow-up period without TEAS intervention (week 4, OR = 0.83, P > 0.05; week 5, OR = 0.83, P > 0.05). The Karnofsky Performance Status value suggested that patients in the true TEAS group experienced an improved quality of life (Between-group differences: week 3, 3.5%, P < 0.05; week 4, 4.6%, P < 0.001; week 5, 5.6%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The 3-week application of TEAS in patients with CRP receiving chronic opioid therapy resulted in a statistically significant reduction in pain scores, but the observed reduction was of uncertain clinical significance. The prolonged analgesic effect of TEAS was not confirmed in this trial.

CLINICALTRIAL

GOV: ChiCTR-TRC-13003803.

Acupuncture for cancer pain: a scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Background

Due to the effectiveness and safety, acupuncture, one of the traditional therapies of Chinese medicine, has been widely used in clinical practice globally. A few systematic review or meta-analyses have proved its effectiveness and safety towards patients with cancer pain, while there are no syntheses among those evidence. The aim of this scoping review is to summarize the evidence from systematic reviews of acupuncture for the treatment of cancer pain and evaluate the breadth and methodological quality of these evidence as well.

Methods

The scoping review process was guided by the methodology framework of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA ScR) and "Arkseyand O'Malley six-stage framework". Electronic searches were carried out in several online databases from inception to Jan 2022. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that involve any type of acupuncture for patients with cancer pain will be included. A pair of reviewers independently screened full texts. Moreover, review characteristics were extracted, and methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 tool.

Results

Twenty-five systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. Manual acupuncture is the most frequently included types of test group intervention (48%), followed by acupuncture + medicine (28%), and auricular acupuncture (12%). All the reviews have declared that acupuncture is an effective method for cancer pain treatment. Eleven reviews (44%) aiming at evaluating the safety also have confirmed that acupuncture is safe for treating cancer pain. However, most included studies were conducted in China. With certain geographical limitations, the findings were not representative within the region. The results of our review may owe to the synthesis of all kinds of cancer pain, and only 2 reviews described the type of cancer pain in detail.

Conclusions

This scoping review synthesizes and evaluates existing evidence of acupuncture for cancer pain. From this scoping review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, there are clear recommendations for future studies: expanding the region of research in the world and trying to conduct the study of different types of cancer pain in details as much as possible. Evidences of acupuncture for cancer pain can inform clinical decision-making.

Systematic review registration

https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-1-0073/, identifier INPLASY202210073.

Using TENS for Pain Control: Update on the State of the Evidence

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a non-pharmacological intervention used in the treatment of acute and chronic pain conditions. The first clinical studies on TENS were published over 50 years ago, when effective parameters of stimulation were unclear and clinical trial design was in its infancy. Over the last two decades, a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying TENS efficacy has led to the development of an adequate dose and has improved outcome measure utilization. The continued uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of TENS to alleviate pain, despite years of research, is related to the quality of the clinical trials included in systematic reviews. This summary of the evidence includes only trials with pain as the primary outcome. The outcomes will be rated as positive (+), negative (−), undecided (U), or equivalent to other effective interventions (=). In comparison with our 2014 review, there appears to be improvement in adverse events and parameter reporting. Importantly, stimulation intensity has been documented as critical to therapeutic success. Examinations of the outcomes beyond resting pain, analgesic tolerance, and identification of TENS responders remain less studied areas of research. This literature review supports the conclusion that TENS may have efficacy for a variety of acute and chronic pain conditions, although the magnitude of the effect remains uncertain due to the low quality of existing literature. In order to provide information to individuals with pain and to clinicians treating those with pain, we suggest that resources for research should target larger, high-quality clinical trials including an adequate TENS dose and adequate timing of the outcome and should monitor risks of bias. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses should focus only on areas with sufficiently strong clinical trials that will result in adequate sample size.

Acupuncture as a Complementary Therapy for Cancer-Induced Bone Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) is a special type of cancer pain and lacks safe and effective treatments. Acupuncture is a potentially valuable treatment for CIBP, studies evaluating the effect of acupuncture on CIBP have increased significantly, but the safety and efficacy of acupuncture to control CIBP remains controversial.

Objective

To provide the first meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of acupuncture in CIBP management.

Data Sources

CNKI, CBM, Wanfang, VIP Database, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception until 1 June 2022.

Study Selection

RCTs with primary bone tumor patients or other types of primary cancer companied by bone metastases as the research subjects and to evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture treatment alone or combined with the control treatment were included. Meanwhile, RCTs should choose the pain score as the primary outcome and pain relief rate, frequency of breakthrough pain, analgesic onset time, analgesia duration, quality of life, and adverse events as reference outcomes.

Data Collection and Analysis

We designed a data-extraction form that was used to extract key information from the articles. Data extraction study evaluation was conducted independently by two reviewers, and a third reviewer would resolve any disagreements. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk bias. The quality of the evidence for main outcomes was evaluated by the GRADE system. Mean differences (MD), relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The forest plots were performed using the Review Manager Software (5.3 version). Subgroup analysis was used to investigate the possible sources of potential heterogeneity. Descriptive analysis was performed in case of unacceptable clinical heterogeneity.

Results

Thirteen RCTs (with 1,069 patients) were included, and all studies were at high risk of bias owing to lack of blinding or other bias. Eleven studies evaluated the effectiveness of acupuncture as a complementary therapy, and showed that acupuncture plus control treatment (compared with control treatment) was connected with reduced pain intensity (MD = −1.34, 95% CI −1.74 to −0.94; Q &lt; 0.1; I2 = 98%, P &lt; 0.01). Subgroup analyses based on acupoints type partly explain the potential heterogeneity. The results also showed that acupuncture plus control treatment (compared with control treatment) was connected with relieving pain intensity, increasing the pain relief rate, reducing the frequency of breakthrough pain, shortening analgesic onset time, extending the analgesic duration, and improving the quality of life. We have no sufficient evidence to prove the effectiveness of acupuncture alone. Four RCTs reported only adverse events related to opioids' side effects. Evidence was qualified as “very low” because of low methodological quality, considerable heterogeneity, or a low number of included studies.

Conclusion

Acupuncture has a certain effect as a complementary therapy on pain management of CIBP, which not only mitigates the pain intensity but also improves the quality of life and reduces the incidence of opioids' side effects, although the evidence level was very low. In future, a larger sample size and rigorously designed RCTs are needed to provide sufficient evidence to identify the efficacy and safety of acupuncture as a treatment for CIBP.

Transcutaneous Electrical Stimulation, Interferential Current and Photobiomodulation May Lead to the Recurrence of Breast Cancer in Rats?

Introduction: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), interferential current therapy (IFC) and photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) have been used in the management of cancer-related pain in adults. However, there are still some controversy regarding the effects of this therapy on tumor cells that may remain after cancer treatment. Objective: To evaluate the risk of recurrence of breast cancer in rats when using TENS, IFC or PBMT. Method: An experimental, randomized, controlled and cross-sectional study. With 90 days of age, 7,12-dimetylbenz(a)anthracene (7,12-DMBA) was administered to rats by gastric gavage to induce mammary cancer. After 120 days the mammary glands of the rats belonging to the group with mammary cancer were removed. Results: 39 female Sprague-Dawley rats were studied: 9 rats without induction of mammary carcinoma; 9 rats with induction of mammary carcinoma and without surgery; 9 rats with induction of mammary carcinoma with surgery and placebo application of TENS, IFC, PBMT; 9 rats with induction of mammary carcinoma, surgery and the application of TENS, IFC and PBMT. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that there was local recurrence of tumors in rats that were stimulated with TENS or IFC, however no evidence of local recurrence with PBMT.

Non-pharmacological integrative therapies for chronic cancer pain

Objective

Chronic pain is one of the most detrimental symptoms exhibited by cancer patients, being an indication for opioid therapy in up to half of the patients’ receiving chemotherapy and in 90% of advanced cases. Various successful non-pharmacological integrative therapy options have been explored and implemented to improve the quality of life in these patients. This review aims to highlight the mechanisms implicated; assessment tools used for cancer pain and summarize current evidence on non-pharmacological approaches in the treatment of chronic cancer pain.

Data sources

A review of the literature was conducted using a combination of MeSH keywords including “Chronic cancer pain,” “Assessment,” “Non-pharmacological management,” and “Integrative therapy.”

Data summary

Data on the approach and assessment of chronic cancer pain as well as non-pharmacological integrative options have been displayed with the help of figures and tables. Of note, non-pharmacological integrative management was divided into three subcategories; physical therapy (involving exercise, acupuncture, massage, and transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation), psychosocial therapy (e.g. mindful practices, supportive therapy), and herbal supplementation.

Conclusions

The use of non-pharmacological integrative therapy in the management of chronic cancer pain has been grossly underestimated and must be considered before or as an adjuvant of other treatment regimens to ensure appropriate care.

A Comprehensive Strategy to Pain Management for Cancer Patients in an Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility

Cancer pain has been shown to have a significant negative impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for people experiencing it. This is also true for patients admitted to inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs). An interdisciplinary approach is often needed to fully address a person's pain to help them attain maximum functional independence and to ensure a safe discharge home. Improving a patient's performance status in an IRF may also be a crucial determinant in their ability to continue receiving treatment for their cancer. However, if a person is determined to no longer be a candidate for aggressive, disease modulating treatment, IRFs can also be utilized to help patients and family's transition to comfort directed care with palliative or hospice services. This article will discuss the interventions of the multidisciplinary inpatient rehabilitation team to address a person's pain.

Effects of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Pain and Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is the usage of a mild electrical current through electrodes that stimulate nerves. Patients with malignancies experience pain and chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. A systematic review was performed to find research evaluating the effect of TENS on these two common symptoms decreasing the quality of life in cancer patients. PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and EMBASE were searched. Original studies, namely randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials, published between April 2007 and May 2020, were considered. The quality of the selected studies was assessed. Seven papers were incorporated in a qualitative synthesis, with 260 patients in total. The studies varied in terms of design, populations, endpoints, quality, treatment duration, procedures and follow-up period. Based on the results, no strict recommendations concerning TENS usage in the cancer patient population could be issued. However, the existing evidence allows us to state that TENS is a safe procedure that may be self-administered by the patients with malignancy in an attempt to relieve different types of pain. There is a need for multi-center, randomized clinical trials with a good methodological design and adequate sample size.

Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Rodent Models of Neuropathic Pain: A Meta-Analysis

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a non-invasive therapeutic intervention that is typically used for many years to treat chronic pain in patients who are refractory to pain medications. However, evidence of the efficacy of TENS treatment for neuropathic pain is lacking in humans. To further understand the efficacy of TENS under various intervention conditions and illuminate the current circumstance and future research directions, we systematically reviewed animal studies investigating the efficacy of TENS in relieving pain in neuropathic pain rodent models. We searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE (via PubMed), and Web of Science and identified 11 studies. Two meta-analyses were performed. The first meta-analysis showed that a single TENS treatment was capable of temporarily ameliorating neuropathic pain when compared to control groups with a significant effect (standardized mean difference: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.65, 2.42; p = 0.0007; I² = 58%). Significant temporary alleviation in neuropathic pain intensity was also observed in the meta-analysis of repetitive TENS (standardized mean difference: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.31, 1.40; p = 0.002; I² = 75%). Subgroup analysis showed no effect of the timing of the application of TENS (test for subgroup difference, p = 0.47). Leave-one-out sensitivity analyses suggested that no single study had an outsized effect on the pooled estimates, which may partly prove the robustness of these findings. Other stratified analyses were prevented by the insufficient number of included studies. Overall, current data suggest that TENS might be a promising therapy to ameliorate neuropathic pain. However, the high risk of bias in the included studies suggests that cautions must be considered when interpreting these findings and it is not reasonable to directly generalize the results obtained from animal studies to clinical practice. Future studies should pay more attention to improving the quality of study design and reporting, thereby facilitating the understanding of mechanisms underlying TENS treatment, reducing more potentially unsuccessful clinical trials, and optimizing the efficacy of TENS for people with neuropathic pain.

Role of Manual Therapy for Neck Pain and Quality of Life in Head and Neck Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review

Background:

Pain is the one the most dreadful side effects of head and neck cancers and cancer related treatments affecting patients during and after the treatment adding to the problems affecting their ability to speak, swallow, breath and feeding. Manual therapy is standard set of physiotherapy treatments used for alleviating neck pain. It has found to be effective in small subset of cancer patients for relieving pain.

Objectives:

To highlight the use of various manual therapy techniques focusing in decreasing neck pain and improving quality of life in Head and Neck Cancer survivors that may suggest its safe utilisation in oncology rehabilitation.

Materials and Methods:

Electronic search was conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL, Pedro, and COCHRANE databases. Reference lists of the included studies and relevant reviews were manually searched. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were evaluated using McMaster critical review form for quantitative studies. A descriptive synthesis was undertaken due to the heterogeneity of the included studies.

Results:

Seven studies were assessed for risk of bias that comprised of three clinical trials, one case series and three case reports that applied Maitland’s mobilisation, Myofascial release, Muscle Energy Techniques to head and neck cancer survivors in various clinical settings. The outcomes highlighted decrease in pain, improvement in cervical range of motion and quality of life.

Conclusion:

This review recommends application of manual therapy to head and neck cancer survivors. However, authors caution application of manual therapy in terms of choosing a particular technique. Further, well designed larger sample size with randomisation and double blinding would help to generate better evidence for head and neck cancer survivors.

An education on pharmacologically active complementary and alternative medicine and its effects on cancer treatment: literature review

PURPOSE

This literature review examines the provision of an education on pharmacologically active complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs), to people with cancer, their carers and oncology health professionals.

METHODS

A search of the published literature between 2000 and 2020, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, was conducted. The search retrieved 1121 studies, 1080 were excluded based on their title or abstract and 26 articles were excluded based on their text. One article was retrieved from the reference lists of the included articles and in total fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. This review utilised Medical Education Research Quality Instrument (MERSQI) to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Four key outcomes were utilised for analysis and recommendations for future education and/or research were generated. The recommendations were graded according to the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT).

RESULTS

This review consistently found that people with cancer, their carers and oncology health professionals derived benefit from a pharmacologically active CAM education and recommends that this population receives one. Conversely, the review found many education formats utilised and no consensus on the most successful methods.

CONCLUSION

Future research should examine who a CAM education should be delivered to, what type of delivery platform is most accessible and useful, and the features of the education that most increase CAM knowledge. The popularity of CAMs amongst people with cancer and the potential dangers associated with their use necessitates further research into how best to communicate CAMs to this population.

Does TENS Reduce the Intensity of Acute and Chronic Pain? A Comprehensive Appraisal of the Characteristics and Outcomes of 169 Reviews and 49 Meta-Analyses

Background and Objectives: Uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) to alleviate pain spans half a century. There has been no attempt to synthesise the entire body of systematic review evidence. The aim of this comprehensive review was to critically appraise the characteristics and outcomes of systematic reviews evaluating the clinical efficacy of TENS for any type of acute and chronic pain in adults. Materials and Methods: We searched electronic databases for full reports of systematic reviews of studies, overviews of systematic reviews, and hybrid reviews that evaluated the efficacy of TENS for any type of clinical pain in adults. We screened reports against eligibility criteria and extracted data related to the characteristics and outcomes of the review, including effect size estimates. We conducted a descriptive analysis of extracted data. Results: We included 169 reviews consisting of eight overviews, seven hybrid reviews and 154 systematic reviews with 49 meta-analyses. A tally of authors' conclusions found a tendency toward benefits from TENS in 69/169 reviews, no benefits in 13/169 reviews, and inconclusive evidence in 87/169 reviews. Only three meta-analyses pooled sufficient data to have confidence in the effect size estimate (i.e., pooled analysis of >500 events). Lower pain intensity was found during TENS compared with control for chronic musculoskeletal pain and labour pain, and lower analgesic consumption was found post-surgery during TENS. The appraisal revealed repeated shortcomings in RCTs that have hindered confident judgements about efficacy, resulting in stagnation of evidence. Conclusions: Our appraisal reveals examples of meta-analyses with 'sufficient data' demonstrating benefit. There were no examples of meta-analyses with 'sufficient data' demonstrating no benefit. Therefore, we recommend that TENS should be considered as a treatment option. The considerable quantity of reviews with 'insufficient data' and meaningless findings have clouded the issue of efficacy. We offer solutions to these issues going forward.

Non-pharmacological treatments for chronic orchialgia: A systemic review

Objective

: To review the outcomes of various therapeutic modalities that can be offered to patients with chronic orchialgia (CO) after failed conservative treatment.

Methods

: A literature search was conducted using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases searching for articles exploring different CO treatment modalities. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach was used to report the results of the literature search.

Results

: A total of 34 studies were included for qualitative analysis. Most of the studies explored microsurgical spermatic cord denervation (MSCD; n = 19). Eight studies involved devices and interventions directed at blocking nerve sensations (pulsed radiofrequency stimulation, n = 5; transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, n = 1; cryoablation, n = 1; and mechanical vibratory stimulation, n = 1). Five studies reported on vasectomy reversal as a modality to relieve post-vasectomy pain syndrome (PVPS), while two studies explored the outcomes of orchidectomy on pain relief in patients with CO.

Conclusion

: Several treatment methods are available in the urologist’s armamentarium for the treatment of CO. MSCD appears to be an appealing treatment modality with encouraging outcomes. Neuropathic pain can be managed with a number of relatively non-invasive modalities. Vasectomy reversal is a sound treatment approach for patients with PVPS and ultimately orchidectomy is a terminal approach that can be discussed with patients suffering from intractable pain.

The role of complementary and alternative methods in the treatment of pain in patients with cancer - current evidence and clinical practice: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Pain related to cancer, despite the numerous treatment options available, is still a challenge in contemporary pain medicine. The unsatisfactory treatment of cancer pain is one of the main reasons why patients seek complementary and alternative methods (CAM) and a more integrative/holistic approach to pain management. The popularity of CAM forces healthcare professionals to provide patients with current and evidence-based information on the effectiveness and safety of CAM. The aim of the paper is to present current evidence and limitations regarding CAM commonly used in the pain management of cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The paper comprehensively reviews the current and most relevant literature considering the integrative approach to management of pain due to cancer disease and/or cancer treatment.

RESULTS

The available data from clinical trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews supports the effectiveness of acupuncture, massage, physical exercises, music therapy, and mind-body therapies as adjunct therapies for alleviating pain in cancer patients, although the supporting evidence is weak or moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available knowledge, physicians should be capable of advising the cancer patient as to which CAM methods can be used safely, which are contraindicated, and what therapeutic effects they may expect, especially when standard pain treatment fails or induces serious side effects. An integrative approach to cancer pain management may improve the quality of pain treatment, patients' quality of life, and satisfaction with pain relief.

Resolving Long-Standing Uncertainty about the Clinical Efficacy of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) to Relieve Pain: A Comprehensive Review of Factors Influencing Outcome

Pain is managed using a biopsychosocial approach and pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a technique whereby pulsed electrical currents are administered through the intact surface of the skin with the intention of alleviating pain, akin to 'electrically rubbing pain away'. Despite over 50 years of published research, uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of TENS remains. The purpose of this comprehensive review is to critically appraise clinical research on TENS to inform future strategies to resolve the 'efficacy-impasse'. The principles and practices of TENS are described to provide context for readers unfamiliar with TENS treatment. The findings of systematic reviews evaluating TENS are described from a historical perspective to provide context for a critical evaluation of factors influencing the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs); including sample populations, outcome measures, TENS techniques, and comparator interventions. Three possibilities are offered to resolve the impasse. Firstly, to conduct large multi-centered RCTs using an enriched enrolment with randomized withdrawal design, that incorporates a 'run-in phase' to screen for potential TENS responders and to optimise TENS treatment according to individual need. Secondly, to meta-analyze published RCT data, irrespective of type of pain, to determine whether TENS reduces the intensity of pain during stimulation, and to include a detailed assessment of levels of certainty and precision. Thirdly, to concede that it may be impossible to determine efficacy due to insurmountable methodological, logistical and financial challenges. The consequences to clinicians, policy makers and funders of this third scenario are discussed. I argue that patients will continue to use TENS irrespective of the views of clinicians, policy makers, funders or guideline panel recommendations, because TENS is readily available without prescription; TENS generates a pleasant sensory experience that is similar to easing pain using warming and cooling techniques; and technological developments such as smart wearable TENS devices will improve usability in the future. Thus, research is needed on how best to integrate TENS into existing pain management strategies by analyzing data of TENS usage by expert-patients in real-world settings.

Neuromodulation for Pain Management in the Inpatient Setting: A Narrative Review

Pain is highly prevalent and pharmacological therapy is not always efficacious. There are a few pathophysiological reasons to believe that neuromodulation would increase the rate of success of pain management. This review article is focused on that aspect, discussing non-invasive or minimally invasive neuromodulation techniques in both the inpatient and outpatient setting. This article provides an in-depth discussion of the multiple neuromodulation techniques available over time to be suitable and effective when used as analgesic therapies for chronic pain. We reviewed the literature and discussed all available neuromodulation options that were tested in the inpatient and outpatient setting. Neuromodulation plays a very important role in treating chronic pain in both inpatient and outpatient setting.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for advanced cancer pain inpatients in specialist palliative care-a blinded, randomized, sham-controlled pilot cross-over trial

PURPOSE

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a treatment option for cancer pain, but the evidence is inconclusive. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TENS.

METHODS

A blinded, randomized, sham-controlled pilot cross-over trial (NCT02655289) was conducted on an inpatient specialist palliative care ward. We included adult inpatients with cancer pain ≥ 3 on an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS). Intensity-modulated high TENS (IMT) was compared with placebo TENS (PBT). Patients used both modes according to their preferred application scheme during 24 h with a 24-h washout phase. The primary outcome was change in average pain intensity on the NRS during the preceding 24 h. Responders were patients with at least a "slight improvement."

RESULTS

Of 632 patients screened, 25 were randomized (sequence IMT-PBT = 13 and PBT-IMT = 12). Finally, 11 patients in IMT-PBT and 9 in PBT-IMT completed the study (N = 20). The primary outcome did not differ between groups (IMT minus PBT: - 0.2, 95% confidence interval - 0.9 to 0.6). However, responder rates were higher in IMT (17/20 [85%] vs. 10/20 [50%], p = 0.0428). Two patients experienced an uncomfortable feeling caused by the current, one after IMT and one after PBT. Seven patients (35%) desired a TENS prescription. Women and patients with incident pain were most likely to benefit from TENS.

CONCLUSION

TENS was safe, but IMT was unlikely to offer more analgesic effects than PBT. Even though many patients desired a TENS prescription, 50% still reported at least "slight pain relief" from PBT. Differences for gender and incident pain aspects demand future trials.

Biomedical applications of electrical stimulation

This review provides a comprehensive overview on the biomedical applications of electrical stimulation (EStim). EStim has a wide range of direct effects on both biomolecules and cells. These effects have been exploited to facilitate proliferation and functional development of engineered tissue constructs for regenerative medicine applications. They have also been tested or used in clinics for pain mitigation, muscle rehabilitation, the treatment of motor/consciousness disorders, wound healing, and drug delivery. However, the research on fundamental mechanism of cellular response to EStim has fell behind its applications, which has hindered the full exploitation of the clinical potential of EStim. Moreover, despite the positive outcome from the in vitro and animal studies testing the efficacy of EStim, existing clinical trials failed to establish strong, conclusive supports for the therapeutic efficacy of EStim for most of the clinical applications mentioned above. Two potential directions of future research to improve the clinical utility of EStim are presented, including the optimization and standardization of the stimulation protocol and the development of more tissue-matching devices.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain management in sickle cell disease

BACKGROUND

Sickle cell disease (SCD), one of the most common inherited disorders, is associated with vaso-occlusive pain episodes and haemolysis leading to recurrent morbidity, hospital admissions and work or school absenteeism. The crises are conventionally treated with opioids, non-opioids and other adjuvants with the risk of developing complications, addictions and drug-seeking behaviour. Different non-pharmacological treatments, such as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) have been used for managing pain in other painful conditions. Hence, the efficacy of TENS for managing pain in SCD needs to be reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of TENS for managing pain in people with SCD who experience pain crises or chronic pain (or both).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Haemoglobinopathies Register, comprising of references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched online trial registries and the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews. Date of the last search: 26 Febraury 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs, where TENS was evaluated for managing pain in people with SCD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of the trials identified by the literature searches according to the inclusion criteria. Two review authors then independently extracted data, assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane standard tool and rated the quality of evidence using the GRADE guidelines.

MAIN RESULTS

One double-blind cross-over RCT with 22 participants with SCD (aged 12 to 27 years) was eligible for inclusion. Following stratification into four pain crises severity grades, participants were then randomised to receive TENS or placebo (sham TENS). The trial was concluded after 60 treatment episodes (30 treatment episodes of each treatment group). There is a lack of clarity regarding the trial design and the analysis of the cross-over data. If a participant was allocated to TENS treatment for an episode of pain and subsequently returned with a further episode of a similar degree of pain, they would then receive the sham TENS treatment (cross-over design). For those experiencing a pain episode of a different severity, it is not clear whether they were re-randomised or given the alternate treatment. Reporting and analysis was based on the total number pain events and not on the number of participants. It is unclear how many participants were crossed over from the TENS group to the sham TENS group and vice versa. The trial had a high risk of bias regarding random sequence generation and allocation concealment; an unclear risk regarding the blinding of participants and personnel; and a low risk regarding the blinding of the outcome assessors and selective outcome reporting. The trial was small and of very low quality; furthermore, given the issue with trial design we were unable to quantitatively analyse the data. Therefore, we present only a narrative summary and caution is advised in interpreting the results. In relation to our pre-defined primary outcomes, the included trial did not report pain relief at two to four weeks post intervention. The trial authors reported that no difference was found in the changes in pain ratings (recorded at one hour and four hours post intervention) between the TENS and the placebo groups. In relation to our secondary outcomes, the analgesic usage during the trial also did not show any difference between groups. Given the quality of the evidence, we are uncertain whether TENS improves overall satisfaction as compared to sham TENS. The ability to cope with activities of daily living was not evaluated. Regarding adverse events, although one case of itching was reported in the TENS group, the site and nature of itching was not clearly stated; hence it cannot be clearly attributed to TENS. Also, two participants receiving 'sham' TENS reported a worsening of pain with the intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since we have only included one small and very low-quality trial, with a high risk of bias across several domains, we are unable to conclude whether TENS is harmful or beneficial for managing pain in people with SCD. There is a need for a well-designed, adequately-powered, RCT to evaluate the role of TENS in managing pain in people with SCD.

Palliative Care and the Management of Common Distressing Symptoms in Advanced Cancer: Pain, Breathlessness, Nausea and Vomiting, and Fatigue

Good symptom management in oncology is associated with improved patient and family quality of life, greater treatment compliance, and may even offer survival advantages. With population growth and aging, the proportion of patients with multiple symptoms—both related and unrelated to their cancer—is anticipated to increase, supporting calls for a more routine and integrated approach to symptom management. This article presents a summary of the literature for the use of symptom assessment tools and reviews the management of four common and distressing symptoms commonly experienced by people with advanced cancer: pain, breathlessness, nausea and vomiting, and fatigue. We also discuss the role of palliative care in supporting a holistic approach to symptom management throughout the cancer trajectory.

The clinical efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for acute and chronic pain: a protocol for a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs)

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to evaluate the clinical efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for any type of acute and chronic pain in adults.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We intend to search electronic databases (Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, PEDRO, Web of Science, AMED and SPORTDiscus) from inception to the present day to identify all randomised controlled trials (RCT) on the use of TENS in adults for any type of pain including acute pain, chronic pain and cancer-related pain. We will screen the RCTs against eligibility criteria for inclusion in our review. Two reviewers will independently undertake RCT selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Primary outcomes will be: (i) participant-reported pain relief of ≥30% expressed as frequency (dichotomous) data; and (ii) participant-reported pain intensity expressed as mean (continuous) data. We will conduct meta-analyses to determine risk ratio for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) or standardised MD for continuous data for TENS versus placebo TENS, no treatment or waiting list control, standard of care, and other treatments. Subgroup analyses will include different pain conditions (eg, acute vs chronic), TENS intensity, during versus after TENS, TENS as a sole treatment versus TENS in combination with other treatments and TENS administered as a single dose versus repetitive dose.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This systematic review will not use data from individual participants, and the results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed publication and presented at a conference.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019125054.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Survivorship, Version 2.2019

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship provide screening, evaluation, and treatment recommendations for consequences of cancer and cancer treatment to aid healthcare professionals who work with survivors of adult-onset cancer. Guidance is also provided to help promote physical activity, weight management, and proper immunizations in survivors and to facilitate care coordination to ensure that all needs are addressed. These NCCN Insights summarize some of the topics discussed by the NCCN Survivorship Panel during the 2019 update of the guidelines, including the survivorship population addressed, ways to improve care coordination, and pain management.

Strategies of complementary and integrative therapies in cancer-related pain-attaining exhaustive cancer pain management

PURPOSE

Complementary integrative therapies (CITs) correspond to growing demand in patients with cancer-related pain. This demand needs to be considered alongside pharmaceutical and/or interventional therapies. CITs can be used to cover certain specific pain-related characteristics. The objective of this review is to present the options for CITs that could be used within dynamic, multidisciplinary, and personalized management, leading to an integrative oncology approach.

METHODS

Critical reflection based on literature analysis and clinical practice.

RESULTS

Most CITs only showed trends in efficacy as cancer pain was mainly a secondary endpoint, or populations were restricted. Physical therapy has demonstrated efficacy in motion and pain, in some specific cancers (head and neck or breast cancers) or in treatments sequelae (lymphedema). In cancer survivors, higher levels of physical activity decrease pain intensity. Due to the multimorphism of cancer pain, certain mind-body therapies acting on anxiety, stress, depression, or mood disturbances (such as massage, acupuncture, healing touch, hypnosis, and music therapy) are efficient on cancer pain. Other mind-body therapies have shown trends in reducing the severity of cancer pain and improving other parameters, and they include education (with coping skills training), yoga, tai chi/qigong, guided imagery, virtual reality, and cognitive-behavioral therapy alone or combined. The outcome sustainability of most CITs is still questioned.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality clinical trials should be conducted with CITs, as their efficacy on pain is mainly based on efficacy trends in pain severity, professional judgment, and patient preferences. Finally, the implementation of CITs requires an interdisciplinary team approach to offer optimal, personalized, cancer pain management.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain - an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain, considered to be pain lasting more than three months, is a common and often difficult to treat condition that can significantly impact upon function and quality of life. Treatment typically includes pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is an adjunct non-pharmacological treatment commonly recommended by clinicians and often used by people with pain.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of TENS to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the safety of TENS when used to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To identify possible sources of inconsistency in the approaches taken to evaluating the evidence related to TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) in the Cochrane Library with a view to recommending strategies to improve consistency in methodology and reporting.To highlight areas of remaining uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) with a view to recommending strategies to reduce any uncertainty.

METHODS

Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), in the Cochrane Library, across all years up to Issue 11 of 12, 2018.Selection of reviewsTwo authors independently screened the results of the electronic search by title and abstract against inclusion/exclusion criteria. We included all Cochrane Reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of TENS in people with chronic pain. We included reviews if they investigated the following: TENS versus sham; TENS versus usual care or no treatment/waiting list control; TENS plus active intervention versus active intervention alone; comparisons between different types of TENS; or TENS delivered using different stimulation parameters.Data extraction and analysisTwo authors independently extracted relevant data, assessed review quality using the AMSTAR checklist and applied GRADE judgements where required to individual reviews. Our primary outcomes included pain intensity and nature/incidence of adverse effects; our secondary outcomes included disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine reviews investigating TENS use in people with defined chronic pain or in people with chronic conditions associated with ongoing pain. One review investigating TENS for phantom or stump-associated pain in people following amputation did not have any included studies. We therefore extracted data from eight reviews which represented 51 TENS-related RCTs representing 2895 TENS-comparison participants entered into the studies.The included reviews followed consistent methods and achieved overall high scores on the AMSTAR checklist. The evidence reported within each review was consistently rated as very low quality. Using review authors' assessment of risk of bias, there were significant methodological limitations in included studies; and for all reviews, sample sizes were consistently small (the majority of studies included fewer than 50 participants per group).Six of the eight reviews presented a narrative synthesis of included studies. Two reviews reported a pooled analysis.Primary and secondary outcomes One review reported a beneficial effect of TENS versus sham therapy at reducing pain intensity on a 0 to 10 scale (MD -1.58, 95% CI -2.08 to -1.09, P < 0.001, I² = 29%, P = 0.22, 5 studies, 207 participants). However the quality of the evidence was very low due to significant methodological limitations and imprecision. A second review investigating pain intensity performed a pooled analysis by combining studies that compared TENS to sham with studies that compared TENS to no intervention (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.34, P = 0.001, I² = 83%, P < 0.001). This pooled analysis was judged as offering very low quality evidence due to significant methodological limitations, large between-trial heterogeneity and imprecision. We considered the approach of combining sham and no intervention data to be problematic since we would predict these different comparisons may be estimating different true effects. All remaining reviews also reported pain intensity as an outcome measure; however the data were presented in narrative review form only.Due to methodological limitation and lack of useable data, we were unable to offer any meaningful report on the remaining primary outcome regarding nature/incidence of adverse effects, nor for the remaining secondary outcomes: disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change for any comparisons.We found the included reviews had a number of inconsistencies when evaluating the evidence from TENS studies. Approaches to assessing risk of bias around the participant, personnel and outcome-assessor blinding were perhaps the most obvious area of difference across included reviews. We also found wide variability in terms of primary and secondary outcome measures, and inclusion/exclusion criteria for studies varied with respect to including studies which assessed immediate effects of single interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found the methodological quality of the reviews was good, but quality of the evidence within them was very low. We were therefore unable to conclude with any confidence that, in people with chronic pain, TENS is harmful, or beneficial for pain control, disability, health-related quality of life, use of pain relieving medicines, or global impression of change. We make recommendations with respect to future TENS study designs which may meaningfully reduce the uncertainty relating to the effectiveness of this treatment in people with chronic pain.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain - an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain, considered to be pain lasting more than three months, is a common and often difficult to treat condition that can significantly impact upon function and quality of life. Treatment typically includes pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is an adjunct non-pharmacological treatment commonly recommended by clinicians and often used by people with pain.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of TENS to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the safety of TENS when used to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To identify possible sources of inconsistency in the approaches taken to evaluating the evidence related to TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) in the Cochrane Library with a view to recommending strategies to improve consistency in methodology and reporting.To highlight areas of remaining uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) with a view to recommending strategies to reduce any uncertainty.

METHODS

Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), in the Cochrane Library, across all years up to Issue 11 of 12, 2018.Selection of reviewsTwo authors independently screened the results of the electronic search by title and abstract against inclusion/exclusion criteria. We included all Cochrane Reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of TENS in people with chronic pain. We included reviews if they investigated the following: TENS versus sham; TENS versus usual care or no treatment/waiting list control; TENS plus active intervention versus active intervention alone; comparisons between different types of TENS; or TENS delivered using different stimulation parameters.Data extraction and analysisTwo authors independently extracted relevant data, assessed review quality using the AMSTAR checklist and applied GRADE judgements where required to individual reviews. Our primary outcomes included pain intensity and nature/incidence of adverse effects; our secondary outcomes included disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine reviews investigating TENS use in people with defined chronic pain or in people with chronic conditions associated with ongoing pain. One review investigating TENS for phantom or stump-associated pain in people following amputation did not have any included studies. We therefore extracted data from eight reviews which represented 51 TENS-related RCTs representing 2895 TENS-comparison participants entered into the studies.The included reviews followed consistent methods and achieved overall high scores on the AMSTAR checklist. The evidence reported within each review was consistently rated as very low quality. Using review authors' assessment of risk of bias, there were significant methodological limitations in included studies; and for all reviews, sample sizes were consistently small (the majority of studies included fewer than 50 participants per group).Six of the eight reviews presented a narrative synthesis of included studies. Two reviews reported a pooled analysis.Primary and secondary outcomes One review reported a beneficial effect of TENS versus sham therapy at reducing pain intensity on a 0 to 10 scale (MD -1.58, 95% CI -2.08 to -1.09, P < 0.001, I² = 29%, P = 0.22, 5 studies, 207 participants). However the quality of the evidence was very low due to significant methodological limitations and imprecision. A second review investigating pain intensity performed a pooled analysis by combining studies that compared TENS to sham with studies that compared TENS to no intervention (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.34, P = 0.001, I² = 83%, P < 0.001). This pooled analysis was judged as offering very low quality evidence due to significant methodological limitations, large between-trial heterogeneity and imprecision. We considered the approach of combining sham and no intervention data to be problematic since we would predict these different comparisons may be estimating different true effects. All remaining reviews also reported pain intensity as an outcome measure; however the data were presented in narrative review form only.Due to methodological limitation and lack of useable data, we were unable to offer any meaningful report on the remaining primary outcome regarding nature/incidence of adverse effects, nor for the remaining secondary outcomes: disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change for any comparisons.We found the included reviews had a number of inconsistencies when evaluating the evidence from TENS studies. Approaches to assessing risk of bias around the participant, personnel and outcome-assessor blinding were perhaps the most obvious area of difference across included reviews. We also found wide variability in terms of primary and secondary outcome measures, and inclusion/exclusion criteria for studies varied with respect to including studies which assessed immediate effects of single interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found the methodological quality of the reviews was good, but quality of the evidence within them was very low. We were therefore unable to conclude with any confidence that, in people with chronic pain, TENS is harmful, or beneficial for pain control, disability, health-related quality of life, use of pain relieving medicines, or global impression of change. We make recommendations with respect to future TENS study designs which may meaningfully reduce the uncertainty relating to the effectiveness of this treatment in people with chronic pain.

Evaluating the analgesic effect and advantage of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation combined with opioid drugs for moderate to severe cancer-related pain: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS), which is also known as acupuncture-like transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), has been widely used in acute or chronic pain. However, previous research has not demonstrated that TEAS is effective for cancer-related pain. Opioid drugs are strongly recommended for treating cancer-related pain, but opioid-induced immunosuppression is still the most intractable drug-induced medical problem. Evaluating the efficacy and potential advantage of TEAS combined with opioid drugs in moderate and severe cancer-related pain in China is important because such studies are lacking.

METHODS/DESIGN

This trial is a multicenter, prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. In total, 160 patients who were enrolled from two hospitals in the Zhejiang Province (China) will be randomly allocated into two groups: a TEAS group and sham TEAS group without acupoint electrical stimulation. Both groups will receive a 21-day interval of chemotherapy and conventional cancer pain therapy. Fifteen treatment sessions will be performed over a three-week period. The primary outcomes will be measured by changes in the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores and equivalent dosage of morphine at baseline, three weeks of treatment and one two-week follow-up. The secondary outcome measures include cellular immunity function, life quality assessment, opioids side effects assessment, and safety and compliance evaluation.

DISCUSSION

This trial is expected to clarify whether TEAS is effective for cancer-related pain. These results demonstrate the advantage of TEAS combined with opioid drugs on improving immune function and decreasing opioid induced side effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-13003803 . Registered on 27 August 2013.

Impact of electro-neuro-feedback on postoperative outcome of impacted lower third molar surgery

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a treatment with electro-neuro-feedback (ENF), a portable transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) device, on the clinical outcome and inflammatory biochemical parameters related to the impacted lower third molar surgery.

Materials and Methods

A randomized, split-mouth, and single-blind study was conducted on 32 patients requiring lower third molars extractions and referred to the Oral Surgery Unit of the School of Dentistry of the University of Messina. Every patient underwent surgical removal of both lower third molars. The first extraction included a placebo (electrodes placement with turned-off device) treatment following the surgery, while the second had the ENF used next to the avulsion and the following days. Clinical parameters were collected 4 days before, immediately after, 2, 4, and 7 days after the surgical procedure. Biochemical parameters were obtained 1 day before the surgical removal and 7 days after. Data were processed using Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test, with significance being set at P < 0.05.

Results

Clinical outcome parameters showed a significant improvement after the ENF treatment, while considered inflammatory markers expressed different patterns.

Conclusions

ENF, a reliable portable TENS device, has demonstrated to be a useful tool in the managing of the postsurgical phases, reducing edema, pain, and consequent pain-killers consumption.

Nonpharmacologic Pain Interventions: A Review of Evidence-Based Practices for Reducing Chronic Cancer Pain

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common issue for patients with cancer and can be challenging to manage effectively. Healthcare professionals need to be knowledgeable about evidence-based nonpharmacologic interventions.
.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review critically appraises the strength and quality of the empirical evidence for nonpharmacologic interventions in reducing chronic cancer pain.
.

METHODS

Intervention studies were critically appraised and summarized by an Oncology Nursing Society Putting Evidence Into Practice team of RNs, advanced practice nurses, and nurse scientists. A level of evidence and a practice recommendation was assigned to each intervention.
.

FINDINGS

Based on evidence, recommended interventions to reduce chronic cancer pain are celiac plexus block for pain related to pancreatic and abdominal cancers and radiation therapy for bone pain. Although psychoeducational interventions are considered likely to be effective, the effective components of these interventions and their dose and duration need to be determined through additional research.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for fibromyalgia in adults

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is characterised by persistent, widespread pain; sleep problems; and fatigue. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is the delivery of pulsed electrical currents across the intact surface of the skin to stimulate peripheral nerves and is used extensively to manage painful conditions. TENS is inexpensive, safe, and can be self-administered. TENS reduces pain during movement in some people so it may be a useful adjunct to assist participation in exercise and activities of daily living. To date, there has been only one systematic review in 2012 which included TENS, amongst other treatments, for fibromyalgia, and the authors concluded that TENS was not effective.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of TENS alone or added to usual care (including exercise) compared with placebo (sham) TENS; no treatment; exercise alone; or other treatment including medication, electroacupuncture, warmth therapy, or hydrotherapy for fibromyalgia in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases up to 18 January 2017: CENTRAL (CRSO); MEDLINE (Ovid); Embase (Ovid); CINAHL (EBSCO); PsycINFO (Ovid); LILACS; PEDRO; Web of Science (ISI); AMED (Ovid); and SPORTDiscus (EBSCO). We also searched three trial registries. There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised trials of TENS treatment for pain associated with fibromyalgia in adults. We included cross-over and parallel-group trial designs. We included studies that evaluated TENS administered using non-invasive techniques at intensities that produced perceptible TENS sensations during stimulation at either the site of pain or over nerve bundles proximal (or near) to the site of pain. We included TENS administered as a sole treatment or TENS in combination with other treatments, and TENS given as a single treatment or as a course of treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently determined study eligibility by assessing each record and reaching agreement by discussion. A third review author acted as arbiter. We did not anonymise the records of studies before assessment. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies before entering information into a 'Characteristics of included studies' table. Primary outcomes were participant-reported pain relief from baseline of 30% or greater or 50% or greater, and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). We assessed the evidence using GRADE and added 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight studies (seven RCTs, one quasi-RCT, 315 adults (299 women), aged 18 to 75 years): six used a parallel-group design and two used a cross-over design. Sample sizes of intervention arms were five to 43 participants.Two studies, one of which was a cross-over design, compared TENS with placebo TENS (82 participants), one study compared TENS with no treatment (43 participants), and four studies compared TENS with other treatments (medication (two studies, 74 participants), electroacupuncture (one study, 44 participants), superficial warmth (one cross-over study, 32 participants), and hydrotherapy (one study, 10 participants)). Two studies compared TENS plus exercise with exercise alone (98 participants, 49 per treatment arm). None of the studies measured participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater or PGIC. Overall, the studies were at unclear or high risk of bias, and in particular all were at high risk of bias for sample size.Only one study (14 participants) measured the primary outcome participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater. Thirty percent achieved 30% or greater reduction in pain with TENS and exercise compared with 13% with exercise alone. One study found 10/28 participants reported pain relief of 25% or greater with TENS compared with 10/24 participants using superficial warmth (42 °C). We judged that statistical pooling was not possible because there were insufficient data and outcomes were not homogeneous.There were no data for the primary outcomes participant-reported pain relief from baseline of 50% or greater and PGIC.There was a paucity of data for secondary outcomes. One pilot cross-over study of 43 participants found that the mean (95% confidence intervals (CI)) decrease in pain intensity on movement (100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS)) during one 30-minute treatment was 11.1 mm (95% CI 5.9 to 16.3) for TENS and 2.3 mm (95% CI 2.4 to 7.7) for placebo TENS. There were no significant differences between TENS and placebo for pain at rest. One parallel group study of 39 participants found that mean ± standard deviation (SD) pain intensity (100-mm VAS) decreased from 85 ± 20 mm at baseline to 43 ± 20 mm after one week of dual-site TENS; decreased from 85 ± 10 mm at baseline to 60 ± 10 mm after single-site TENS; and decreased from 82 ± 20 mm at baseline to 80 ± 20 mm after one week of placebo TENS. The authors of seven studies concluded that TENS relieved pain but the findings of single small studies are unlikely to be correct.One study found clinically important improvements in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) subscales for work performance, fatigue, stiffness, anxiety, and depression for TENS with exercise compared with exercise alone. One study found no additional improvements in FIQ scores when TENS was added to the first three weeks of a 12-week supervised exercise programme.No serious adverse events were reported in any of the studies although there were reports of TENS causing minor discomfort in a total of 3 participants.The quality of evidence was very low. We downgraded the GRADE rating mostly due to a lack of data; therefore, we have little confidence in the effect estimates where available.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient high-quality evidence to support or refute the use of TENS for fibromyalgia. We found a small number of inadequately powered studies with incomplete reporting of methodologies and treatment interventions.

2017 update on pain management in patients with chronic kidney disease

The prevalence of pain has been reported to be >60-70% among patients with advanced and end-stage kidney disease. Although the underlying etiologies of pain may vary, pain per se has been linked to lower quality of life and depression. The latter is of great concern given its known association with reduced survival among patients with end-stage kidney disease. We herein discuss and update the management of pain in patients with chronic kidney disease with and without requirement for renal replacement therapy with the focus on optimizing pain control while minimizing therapy-induced complications.

Matrix stimulation in cancer pain: Methodology, safety and effectiveness

Background

This feasibility study addresses the applicability of matrix electrodes for the reduction of ongoing pain in cancer patients via low‐frequency electrical stimulation (LFS).

Methods

Low‐frequency matrix stimulation (4 Hz) was applied to the skin within the ‘Head's zones’ referring to the tumour localization of cancer pain patients. Pain at baseline was compared to a 3‐day treatment interval consisting of 5 min of matrix stimulation in the morning and evening followed by a 3‐day follow‐up period without therapy. Main outcome parameters included numeric rating scale values (rating scale 0–100), painDETECT, HADS, and German pain questionnaire, as well as the opioid intake, calculated as the oral morphine equivalent (OME).

Results

Twenty patients with cancer pain (aged 64.4 ± 10.3; 9 women) were examined. In the majority of patients, the pain was classified as nociceptive. The mean pain reduction achieved by matrix therapy was 30%, under stable daily controlled‐release opioid doses between 177 and 184 mg/day (OME). Seventeen patients (85%) were responders, defined by a pain reduction of at least 30%, while four responders experienced a pain reduction of over 50%. The only side effect was short‐term erythema.

Conclusion

Findings are consistent with the concept of synaptic long‐term depression in cancer pain induced after conditioning LFS. Despite the short, but well‐tolerated, treatment duration of 2 × 5 min/day, effects persisted throughout the 3‐day follow‐up.

Significance

Cutaneous neuromodulation using LFS via a matrix electrode has been shown to be a safe intervention for effectively reducing cancer pain in palliative care patients.

Complementary Therapies for Symptom Management in Cancer Patients

Cancer patients are often poly-symptomatic which distressingly affects their quality of lives (QOLs). Alhough, conventional management provides adequate symptom control, yet is coupled with some limitations. Complementary therapies (CTs) have shown beneficial effects in cancer patients for symptomatic relief. The aim of this article is to provide evidence-based review of commonly used CTs for symptom management in cancer care. Hypnosis has promising evidence to be used for managing symptoms such as pain, chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting, distress, fatigue, and hot flashes. Guided imagery increases comfort and can be used as a psycho-supportive therapy. Meditation substantially improves psychological function, mental health, and QOL. Cognitive behavioral therapies effectively reduce pain, distress, fatigue, anxiety, and depression; and improve subjective sleep outcomes along with mood and QOL. Yoga has short term beneficial effects for anxiety, depression, fatigue, perceived stress, QOL, and well-being. T'ai Chi and qigong are beneficial adjunctive therapies for supportive cancer care, but their role in reducing cancer pain is not well proven. Acupuncture is effective for reducing treatment related side-effects, pain and fatigue. Other therapies such as massage techniques, energy therapies, and spiritual interventions have also demonstrated positive role in managing cancer-related symptoms and improve overall well-being. However, the clinical effectiveness of these therapies for symptom management in cancer patients cannot be concluded due to poor strength of evidence. Nonetheless, these are relatively free from risks and hence can be given along with conventional treatments. Only by tailoring these therapies as per patient's beliefs and preferences, optimal patient-centered holistic care can be provided.

The role of drugs in bone pain

Painful symptomatology in the skeletal system can be found in various pathological conditions and can be either localised or diffused. Bone tenderness is common in those who are of an elderly age.

TREATMENT STRATEGY

Patients should be informed of the possible causes of their pain and the different therapies that could alleviate it; furthermore they should be encouraged to have an active role in their therapy. It is necessary to prevent the onset of the pain (by the clock) by considering the biological half-life, the bioavailability and the duration of action of the therapy. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), pain treatment is based on a three-step ladder.

ADJUVANT THERAPIES

Adjuvant therapies are often associated with the drugs in the WHO three step ladder. This heterogeneous group of non-analgesic drugs is used in the treatment of bone pain by bettering the analgesia or reducing the side effects brought on by analgesics.

CONCLUSION

In the daily struggle that doctors face to treat their patients, pain management should not be disregarded. Among the various types of pain, bone pain, must not be underestimated but be fought against by using all means available. Patients need to be treated depending on the severity of their pain, NSAIDs should be the preferred choice of treatment for acute pain but not for that of chronic pain. In the case of chronic pain opioids should be used in their most recent fomulations as they can guarantee fewer side effects. Patients should also be prescribed adjuvant drugs as well as being given psychological support in order to ensure successful treatment.

Effectiveness of acupuncture and related therapies for palliative care of cancer: overview of systematic reviews

Acupuncture and related therapies such as moxibustion and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation are often used to manage cancer-related symptoms, but their effectiveness and safety are controversial. We conducted this overview to summarise the evidence on acupuncture for palliative care of cancer. Our systematic review synthesised the results from clinical trials of patients with any type of cancer. The methodological quality of the 23 systematic reviews in this overview, assessed using the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews Instrument, was found to be satisfactory. There is evidence for the therapeutic effects of acupuncture for the management of cancer-related fatigue, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and leucopenia in patients with cancer. There is conflicting evidence regarding the treatment of cancer-related pain, hot flashes and hiccups, and improving patients' quality of life. The available evidence is currently insufficient to support or refute the potential of acupuncture and related therapies in the management of xerostomia, dyspnea and lymphedema and in the improvement of psychological well-being. No serious adverse effects were reported in any study. Because acupuncture appears to be relatively safe, it could be considered as a complementary form of palliative care for cancer, especially for clinical problems for which conventional care options are limited.

Skin impedance is not a factor in transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation effectiveness

OBJECTIVE

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a nonpharmacological intervention used to manage pain using skin surface electrodes. Optimal electrode placement is unclear. We hypothesized that better analgesia would occur if electrodes were placed over sites with lower skin impedance. Optimal site selection (OSS) and sham site selection (SSS) electrode sites on the forearm were identified using a standard clinical technique.

METHODS

Experiment 1 measured skin impedance in the forearm at OSS and SSS. Experiment 2 was a crossover design double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing OSS-TENS, SSS-TENS, and placebo TENS (P-TENS) to confirm differences in skin impedance between OSS and SSS, and measure change in pressure pain threshold (PPT) following a 30-minute TENS treatment. Healthy volunteers were recruited (ten for Experiment 1 [five male, five female] and 24 for Experiment 2 [12 male, 12 female]). TENS was applied for 30 minutes at 100 Hz frequency, 100 µs pulse duration, and "strong but nonpainful" amplitude.

RESULTS

Experiment 1 results demonstrate significantly higher impedance at SSS (17.69±1.24 Ω) compared to OSS (13.53±0.57 Ω) (P=0.007). For Experiment 2, electrode site impedance was significantly higher over SSS, with both the impedance meter (P=0.001) and the TENS unit (P=0.012) compared to OSS. PPT change was significantly greater for both OSS-TENS (P=0.024) and SSS-TENS (P=0.025) when compared to P-TENS. PPT did not differ between the two active TENS treatments (P=0.81).

CONCLUSION

Skin impedance is lower at sites characterized as optimal using the described technique of electrode site selection. When TENS is applied at adequate intensities, skin impedance is not a factor in attainment of hypoalgesia of the forearm in healthy subjects. Further investigation should include testing in patients presenting with painful conditions.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults

BACKGROUND

This is the first update of a Cochrane review published in Issue 5, 2010 on transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults. Pain may present in a body part that has been amputated (phantom pain) or at the site of amputation (stump pain), or both. Phantom pain and stump pain are complex and multidimensional and the underlying pathophysiology remains unclear. The condition remains a severe burden for those who are affected by it. The mainstay treatments are predominately pharmacological, with increasing acknowledgement of the need for non-drug interventions. TENS has been recommended as a treatment option but there has been no systematic review of available evidence. Hence, the effectiveness of TENS for phantom pain and stump pain is currently unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original version of the review we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, PEDRO and SPORTDiscus (February 2010). For this update, we searched the same databases for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from 2010 to 25 March 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We only included RCTs investigating the use of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain following an amputation in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We planned that where available and appropriate, data from outcome measures were to be pooled and presented as an overall estimate of the effectiveness of TENS.

MAIN RESULTS

In the original review there were no RCTs that examined the effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain in adults. For this update, we did not identify any additional RCTs for inclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no RCTs to judge the effectiveness of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain. The published literature on TENS for phantom pain and stump pain lacks the methodological rigour and robust reporting needed to confidently assess its effectiveness. Further RCT evidence is required before an assessment can be made. Since publication of the original version of this review, we have found no new studies and our conclusions remain unchanged.

Spinal cord stimulation for cancer-related pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a review first published in The Cochrane Library in Issue 3, 2013. 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

This is an update of a review first published in The Cochrane Library in Issue 3, 2013. The search strategy for the update was the same as in the original review. We searched the following bibliographic databases in order to identify relevant studies: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; EMBASE; and CBM (Chinese Biomedical Database) in October 2014. We also handsearched relevant journals. There were no language restrictions.

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 literature search for the update of this review found 121 potentially eligible articles. 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 prespecified 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

No new studies were identified for inclusion in this update of the review. Four before-and-after case series studies (a total of 92 participants) met our criteria for inclusion in the previous version of the review. 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; each trial reported data differently. In two trials, pain relief was achieved in 76% (48/63) of participants 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 participants with cancer could not be calculated. Since all trials were small, non-randomised controlled trials, they carried high or unclear risk of all types of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the first publication of this review, no new studies were identified. 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 participants with cancer-related pain.

Symptom management in the older adult: 2015 update

This article updates the 2002 Jamie von Roenn article about "the palliation of commonly observed symptoms in older patients, including pain, neuropsychiatric, gastrointestinal, and respiratory symptoms." When palliative care was last covered in Clinics in Geriatric Medicine, President George W. Bush had just signed the No Child Left Behind Act, Homeland Security was being established, Michael Jackson won the Artist of the Century Award at the American Music Awards, and gas cost $1.61 a gallon. What has changed in the last decade and a half?

Application of low frequency and medium frequency currents in the management of acute and chronic pain-a narrative review

Trancutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and interferential therapy (IFT) have been a regular line of treatment for various types of acute and chronic pain. This review aims to compile the latest literature in pain management using these modalities which use low-frequency and medium-frequency currents. The Cochrane Library, Scopus, PubMed, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched and studies were examined from their inception till October 2013. After title and abstract screening the relevant studies were included for this review. We found through this review that even though TENS and IFT are used in management of pain, there is limited amount of high quality research available in this area. Most of the studies lack methodological quality and have a low sample size.

Using TENS for pain control: the state of the evidence

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a nonpharmacological intervention that activates a complex neuronal network to reduce pain by activating descending inhibitory systems in the central nervous system to reduce hyperalgesia. The evidence for TENS efficacy is conflicting and requires not only description but also critique. Population-specific systemic reviews and meta-analyses are emerging, indicating both HF and LF TENS being shown to provide analgesia, specifically when applied at a strong, nonpainful intensity. The purpose of this article is to provide a critical review of the latest basic science and clinical evidence for TENS. Additional research is necessary to determine if TENS has effects specific to mechanical stimuli and/or beyond reduction of pain and will improve activity levels, function and quality of life.

Analgesic prescribing in palliative care

Pain management requires a multimodal approach involving pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies. It is important to take a detailed history and examine the patient before prescribing any analgesia. This article focuses on assessment and management of pain in palliative care patients.

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.