The H-Wave device is an effective and safe non-pharmacological analgesic for chronic pain: a meta-analysis

Positive Clinical Outcomes for Severe Reported Pain Using Robust Non-Addictive Home Electrotherapy-A Case-Series

The North American opioid epidemic has resulted in over 800,000 related premature overdose fatalities since 2000, with the United States leading the world in highest opioid deaths per capita. Despite increased federal funding in recent years, intended to address this crisis, opioid overdose mortality has continued to increase. Legally prescribed opioids also chronically induce a problematic reduction in affect. While an ideal analgesic has yet to be developed, some effective multimodal non-opioid pharmacological regimens for acute pain management are being more widely utilized. Some investigators have suggested that a safer and more scientifically sound approach might be to induce "dopamine homeostasis" through non-pharmacological approaches, since opioid use even for acute pain of short duration is now being strongly questioned. There is also increasing evidence suggesting that some more robust forms of electrotherapy could be applied as an effective adjunct to avoid the problems associated with opioids. This 4-patient case-series presents such an approach to treatment of severe pain. All 4 of these chiropractic treatment cases involved a component of knee osteoarthritis, in addition to other reported areas of pain. Each patient engaged in a home recovery strategy using H-Wave® device stimulation (HWDS) to address residual extremity issues following treatment of spinal subluxation and other standard treatments. A simple statistical analysis was conducted to determine the change in pain scores (Visual Analogue Scale) of pre and post electrotherapy treatments, resulting in significant reductions in self-reported pain (p-value = 0.0002). Three of the four patients continued using the home therapy device long-term as determined by a post-analysis questionnaire. This small case-series demonstrated notably positive outcomes, suggesting consideration of home use of HWDS for safe, non-pharmacological and non-addictive treatment of severe pain.

Clinical and Quality of Life Benefits for End-Stage Workers' Compensation Chronic Pain Claimants following H-Wave® Device Stimulation: A Retrospective Observational Study with Mean 2-Year Follow-Up

Previously promising short-term H-Wave^® device stimulation (HWDS) outcomes prompted this retrospective cohort study of the longer-term effects on legacy workers' compensation chronic pain claimants. A detailed chart-review of 157 consecutive claimants undergoing a 30-day HWDS trial (single pain management practice) from February 2018 to November 2019 compiled data on pain, restoration of function, quality of life (QoL), and polypharmacy reduction into a summary spreadsheet for an independent statistical analysis. Non-beneficial trials in 64 (40.8%) ended HWDS use, while 19 (12.1%) trial success charts lacked adequate data for assessing critical outcomes. Of the 74 final treatment study group charts, missing data points were removed for a statistical analysis. Pain chronicity was 7.8 years with 21.6 ± 12.2 months mean follow-up. Mean pain reduction was 35%, with 89% reporting functional improvement. Opioid consumption decreased in 48.8% of users and 41.5% completely stopped; polypharmacy decreased in 36.8% and 24.4% stopped. Zero adverse events were reported and those who still worked usually continued working. An overall positive experience occurred in 66.2% (p < 0.0001), while longer chronicity portended the risk of trial or treatment failure. Positive outcomes in reducing pain, opioid/polypharmacy, and anxiety/depression, while improving function/QoL, occurred in these challenging chronic pain injury claimants. Level of evidence: III.

Job-Related Performance and Quality of Life Benefits in First Responders Given Access to H-Wave® Device Stimulation: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Current chronic pain treatments primarily target symptoms and are often associated with harmful side-effects and complications, while safer non-invasive electrotherapies like H-Wave® device stimulation (HWDS) have been less explored. The goal of this study is to evaluate first responder-reported effects of HWDS on job-related and quality-of-life measures. This is a retrospective cohort study where first responders were surveyed following voluntary use of HWDS regarding participant experience, frequency of use, job-related performance, and quality-of-life. Responses were analyzed using means comparison tests, while bivariate analysis assessed responses associated with HWDS usage. Overall, 92.9% of first responder HWDS users (26/28) reported a positive experience (p < 0.0001), with 82.1% citing pain reduction (p = 0.0013), while 78.6% indicated it would be beneficial to have future device access (p = 0.0046). Participants using H-Wave® were at least six times more likely to report higher rates of benefit (100% vs. 0%, p = 0.022), including pain reduction (91.3% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.021) and improved range-of-motion (93.3% vs. 69.2%, p = 0.044). Spending more time with family was associated with better job performance following frequent HWDS use (50% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.032). Repetitive first responder H-Wave® use, with minimal side effects and easy utilization, resulted in significant pain reduction, improvements in job performance and range-of-motion, and increased time spent with family, resulting in overall positive experiences and health benefits. Level of Evidence: III.

DNA Directed Pro-Dopamine Regulation Coupling Subluxation Repair, H-Wave® and Other Neurobiologically Based Modalities to Address Complexities of Chronic Pain in a Female Diagnosed with Reward Deficiency Syndrome (RDS): Emergence of Induction of “Dopamine Homeostasis” in the Face of the Opioid Crisis

Addiction is a complex multifactorial condition. Established genetic factors can provide clear guidance in assessing the risk of addiction to substances and behaviors. Chronic stress can accumulate, forming difficult to recognize addiction patterns from both genetic and epigenetic (environmental) factors. Furthermore, psychological/physical/chemical stressors are typically categorized linearly, delaying identification and treatment. The patient in this case report is a Caucasian female, aged 36, who presented with chronic pain and partial disability following a surgically repaired trimalleolar fracture. The patient had a history of unresolved attention deficit disorder and an MRI scan of her brain revealed atrophy and functional asymmetry. In 2018, the patient entered the Bajaj Chiropractic Clinic, where initial treatment focused on re-establishing integrity of the spine and lower extremity biomechanics and graduated into cognitive behavior stabilization assisted by DNA pro-dopamine regulation guided by Genetic Addiction Risk Severity testing. During treatment (2018–2021), progress achieved included: improved cognitive clarity, focus, sleep, anxiety, and emotional stability in addition to pain reduction (75%); elimination of powerful analgesics; and reduced intake of previously unaddressed alcoholism. To help reduce hedonic addictive behaviors and pain, coupling of H-Wave with corrective chiropractic care seems prudent. We emphasize the importance of genetic assessment along with attempts at inducing required dopaminergic homeostasis via precision KB220PAM. It is hypothesized that from preventive care models, a new standard is emerging including self-awareness and accountability for reward deficiency as a function of hypodopaminergia. This case study documents the progression of a patient dealing with the complexities of an injury, pain management, cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, and the application of universal health principles towards correction versus palliative care.

Hypothesizing in the Face of the Opioid Crisis Coupling Genetic Addiction Risk Severity (GARS) Testing with Electrotherapeutic Nonopioid Modalities Such as H-Wave Could Attenuate Both Pain and Hedonic Addictive Behaviors

In the United States, amid the opioid overdose epidemic, nonaddicting/nonpharmacological proven strategies are available to treat pain and manage chronic pain effectively without opioids. Evidence supporting the long-term use of opioids for pain is lacking, as is the will to alter the drug-embracing culture in American chronic pain management. Some pain clinicians seem to prefer classical analgesic agents that promote unwanted tolerance to analgesics and subsequent biological induction of the "addictive brain". Reward genes play a vital part in modulation of nociception and adaptations in the dopaminergic circuitry. They may affect various sensory and affective components of the chronic pain syndromes. The Genetic Addiction Risk Severity (GARS) test coupled with the H-Wave at entry in pain clinics could attenuate pain and help prevent addiction. The GARS test results identify high-risk for both drug and alcohol, and H-Wave can be initiated to treat pain instead of opioids. The utilization of H-Wave to aid in pain reduction and mitigation of hedonic addictive behaviors is recommended, notwithstanding required randomized control studies. This frontline approach would reduce the possibility of long-term neurobiological deficits and fatalities associated with potent opioid analgesics.

H-Wave® Device Stimulation: A Critical Review

Pain treatments have historically centered on drugs, but an “opioid crisis” has necessitated new standards of care, with a paradigm shift towards multi-modal pain management emphasizing early movement, non-narcotics, and various adjunctive therapies. Electrotherapies remain understudied and most lack high-quality clinical trials, despite a desperate need for effective adjunctive options. A systematic search of human clinical studies on H-Wave^® device stimulation (HWDS) was conducted as well as a comprehensive review of articles articulating possible HWDS mechanisms of action. Studies unrelated to H-Wave were excluded. Data synthesis summarizes outcomes and study designs, categorized as pre-clinical or clinical. Pre-clinical studies demonstrated that HWDS utilizes a biphasic waveform to induce non-fatiguing muscle contractions which positively affect nerve function, blood and lymph flow. Multiple clinical studies have reported significant benefits for diabetic and non-specific neuropathic pain, where function also improved, and pain medication usage substantially dropped. In conclusion, low- to moderate-quality HWDS studies have reported reduced pain, restored functionality, and lower medication use in a variety of disorders, although higher-quality research is needed to verify condition-specific applicability. HWDS has enough reasonable evidence to be considered as an adjunctive component of non-opioid multi-modal pain management, given its excellent safety profile and relative low cost. Level of Evidence: III.

Performance of Pain Interventionalists From Different Specialties in Treating Degenerative Disk Disease-Related Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVES

To examine the utilization of current common treatments by providers from different specialties and the effect on delaying spinal surgery in patients with disk degenerative disease (DDD) related low back pain.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study using data from the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database (2005-2013).

SETTING

Not applicable.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (N=6229) newly diagnosed with DDD-related low back pain who received interventional treatments from only 1 provider specialty and continuously enrolled in the database for 3 years after diagnosis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Measures of treatment utilization and cost were constructed for patients who received spinal surgery within 3 years after diagnosis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine time to surgery among provider specialties and generalized linear models were used to examine cost differences among provider specialties.

RESULTS

Of the 6229 patients, 427 (6.86%) underwent spinal surgery with unadjusted mean interventional treatment costs ranging from $555 to $851. Although the differences in mean costs across provider specialties were large, they were not statistically significant. Cox proportional hazards models showed that there was no significant difference between provider specialties in the time from DDD diagnosis to spinal surgery. However, patients diagnosed with DDD at a younger age and receiving physical therapy had significantly delayed time to surgery (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.81 and hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.96, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there were no statistically significant differences among provider specialties for time to surgery and cost, patients receiving physical therapy had significantly delayed time to surgery.

Interventions for treating pain and disability in adults with complex regional pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

There is currently no strong consensus regarding the optimal management of complex regional pain syndrome although a multitude of interventions have been described and are commonly used.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews of the effectiveness of any therapeutic intervention used to reduce pain, disability or both in adults with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS).

METHODS

We identified Cochrane reviews and non-Cochrane reviews through a systematic search of the following databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS and PEDro. We included non-Cochrane systematic reviews where they contained evidence not covered by identified Cochrane reviews. The methodological quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR tool.We extracted data for the primary outcomes pain, disability and adverse events, and the secondary outcomes of quality of life, emotional well being and participants' ratings of satisfaction or improvement. Only evidence arising from randomised controlled trials was considered. We used the GRADE system to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six Cochrane reviews and 13 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane reviews demonstrated better methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. Trials were typically small and the quality variable.There is moderate quality evidence that intravenous regional blockade with guanethidine is not effective in CRPS and that the procedure appears to be associated with the risk of significant adverse events.There is low quality evidence that bisphosphonates, calcitonin or a daily course of intravenous ketamine may be effective for pain when compared with placebo; graded motor imagery may be effective for pain and function when compared with usual care; and that mirror therapy may be effective for pain in post-stroke CRPS compared with a 'covered mirror' control. This evidence should be interpreted with caution. There is low quality evidence that local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade is not effective. Low quality evidence suggests that physiotherapy or occupational therapy are associated with small positive effects that are unlikely to be clinically important at one year follow up when compared with a social work passive attention control.For a wide range of other interventions, there is either no evidence or very low quality evidence available from which no conclusions should be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a critical lack of high quality evidence for the effectiveness of most therapies for CRPS. Until further larger trials are undertaken, formulating an evidence-based approach to managing CRPS will remain difficult.

Interventions for treating pain and disability in adults with complex regional pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

There is currently no strong consensus regarding the optimal management of complex regional pain syndrome although a multitude of interventions have been described and are commonly used.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews of the effectiveness of any therapeutic intervention used to reduce pain, disability or both in adults with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS).

METHODS

We identified Cochrane reviews and non-Cochrane reviews through a systematic search of the following databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS and PEDro. We included non-Cochrane systematic reviews where they contained evidence not covered by identified Cochrane reviews. The methodological quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR tool.We extracted data for the primary outcomes pain, disability and adverse events, and the secondary outcomes of quality of life, emotional well being and participants' ratings of satisfaction or improvement. Only evidence arising from randomised controlled trials was considered. We used the GRADE system to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six Cochrane reviews and 13 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane reviews demonstrated better methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. Trials were typically small and the quality variable.There is moderate quality evidence that intravenous regional blockade with guanethidine is not effective in CRPS and that the procedure appears to be associated with the risk of significant adverse events.There is low quality evidence that bisphosphonates, calcitonin or a daily course of intravenous ketamine may be effective for pain when compared with placebo; graded motor imagery may be effective for pain and function when compared with usual care; and that mirror therapy may be effective for pain in post-stroke CRPS compared with a 'covered mirror' control. This evidence should be interpreted with caution. There is low quality evidence that local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade is not effective. Low quality evidence suggests that physiotherapy or occupational therapy are associated with small positive effects that are unlikely to be clinically important at one year follow up when compared with a social work passive attention control.For a wide range of other interventions, there is either no evidence or very low quality evidence available from which no conclusions should be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a critical lack of high quality evidence for the effectiveness of most therapies for CRPS. Until further larger trials are undertaken, formulating an evidence-based approach to managing CRPS will remain difficult.

Repetitive H-wave device stimulation and program induces significant increases in the range of motion of post operative rotator cuff reconstruction in a double-blinded randomized placebo controlled human study

Background

Albeit other prospective randomized controlled clinical trials on H-Wave Device Stimulation (HWDS), this is the first randomized double-blind Placebo controlled prospective study that assessed the effects of HWDS on range of motion and strength testing in patients who underwent rotator cuff reconstruction.

Methods

Twenty-two patients were randomly assigned into one of two groups: 1) H-Wave device stimulation (HWDS); 2) Sham-Placebo Device (PLACEBO). All groups received the same postoperative dressing and the same device treatment instructions. Group I was given HWDS which they were to utilize for one hour twice a day for 90 days postoperatively. Group II was given the same instructions with a Placebo device (PLACEBO). Range of motion was assessed by using one-way ANOVA with a Duncan Multiple Range Test for differences between the groups preoperatively, 45 days postoperatively, and 90 days postoperatively by using an active/passive scale for five basic ranges of motions: Forward Elevation, External Rotation (arm at side), External Rotation (arm at 90 degrees abduction), Internal Rotation (arm at side), and Internal Rotation (arm at 90 degrees abduction). The study also evaluated postoperative changes in strength by using the Medical Research Council (MRC) grade assessed strength testing.

Results

Patients who received HWDS compared to PLACEBO demonstrated, on average, significantly improved range of motion. Results confirm a significant difference for external rotation at 45 and 90 days postoperatively; active range at 45 days postoperatively (p = 0.007), active at 90 days postoperatively (p = 0.007). Internal rotation also demonstrated significant improvement compared to PLACEBO at 45 and 90 days postoperatively; active range at 45 days postoperatively (p = 0.007), and active range at 90 days postoperatively (p = 0.006). There was no significant difference between the two groups for strength testing.

Conclusion

HWDS compared to PLACEBO induces a significant increase in range of motion in positive management of rotator cuff reconstruction, supporting other previous research on HWDS and improvement in function. Interpretation of this preliminary investigation while suggestive of significant increases in Range of Motion of Post -Operative Rotator Cuff Reconstruction, warrants further confirmation in a larger double-blinded sham controlled randomized study.

The H-Wave((R)) Device Induces NODependent Augmented Microcirculation and Angiogenesis, Providing Both Analgesia and Tissue Healing in Sports Injuries

The hypothesis that the H-Wave(R) device (Electronic Waveform Lab, Inc., Huntington Beach, CA), a small-diameter fiber stimulator, is a paradigm shift of electrotherapeutic treatment of pain associated with human neuropathies and sports injuries is based on a number of its properties. The primary effect of H-Wave(R) device stimulation (HWDS) is the stimulation of "red-slow-twitch" skeletal muscle fibers. The authors propose, based on the unique waveform, that the H-Wave(R) device specifically and directly stimulates the small smooth muscle fibers within the lymphatic vessels ultimately leading to fluid shifts and reduced edema. In unpublished rat studies, it has been observed that HWDS induces protein clearance. The H-Wave(R) device was designed to stimulate an ultra low frequency (1-2 Hz), low tension, nontetanizing, and nonfatiguing contraction, which closely mimics voluntary or natural muscle contractions. The H-Wave(R) device can stimulate small fibers due in part to its exponentially decaying waveform and constant current generator activity. The main advantage of these technologies over currently applied electrical stimulators (eg, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulator [TENS], interferential [IF], neuromuscular electrical stimulation [NMES], high-volt galvanic, etc.) is that H-Wave\'s(R) small fiber contraction does not trigger an activation of the motor nerves of the large white muscle fibers or the sensory delta and C pain nerve fibers, thus eliminating the negative and painful effects of tetanizing fatigue, which reduces transcapillary fluid shifts. Another function of the H-Wave(R) device is an anesthetic effect on pain conditions, unlike a TENS unit which in the short term activates a hypersensory overload effect (gate theory) to stop pain signals from reaching the thalamic region of the brain. When the H-Wave(R) device is used at high frequency (60 Hz), it acts intrinsically on the nerve to deactivate the sodium pump within the nerve fiber, leading to a long-lasting anesthetic/analgesic effect due to an accumulative postsynaptic depression. Moreover, HWDS produces a nitric oxide (NO)-dependent enhancement of microcirculation and angiogenesis in rats. Thus, the authors hypothesize that because of these innate properties of the H-Wave(R) device, it may provide a paradigm shift for the treatment of both short- and long-term inflammatory conditions associated with pain due to sports injuries. A recent meta-analysis found a moderate-to-strong effect of the H-Wave(R) device in providing pain relief, reducing the requirement for pain medication, and increasing functionality. The most robust effect was observed for improved functionality, suggesting that the H-Wave(R) device may facilitate a quicker return to the field.

KEYWORDS

H-Wave(R) device; sportsmedicine, nitric oxide-dependent blood flow; analgesia; angiogenesis.

Hypothesizing that brain reward circuitry genes are genetic antecedents of pain sensitivity and critical diagnostic and pharmacogenomic treatment targets for chronic pain conditions

While it is well established that the principal ascending pathways for pain originate in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord and in the medulla, the control and sensitivity to pain may reside in additional neurological loci, especially in the mesolimbic system of the brain (i.e., a reward center), and a number of genes and associated polymorphisms may indeed impact pain tolerance and or sensitivity. It is hypothesized that these polymorphisms associate with a predisposition to intolerance or tolerance to pain. It is further hypothesized that identification of certain gene polymorphisms provides a unique therapeutic target to assist in the treatment of pain. It is hereby proposed that pharmacogenetic testing of certain candidate genes (i.e., mu receptors, PENK etc.) will result in pharmacogenomic solutions personalized to the individual patient, with potential improvement in clinical outcomes.