Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for the treatment of renal colic in the emergency department: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for Various Outcomes in Emergency Department Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Pain is a prevalent complaint in emergency departments (EDs) worldwide. Traditional pharmacological methods for pain relief, such as opioids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), have notable side effects and risks. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a non-pharmacological alternative that has shown promise in various clinical settings. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of TENS for pain management and other outcomes in ED settings. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted across six major databases: PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), from inception until June 25, 2024. Randomized clinical trials involving the use of TENS in ED settings were included. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. The search yielded 3,569 papers, of which 2,889 were screened after removing duplicates. Thirteen full-text articles were reviewed, and seven studies met the inclusion criteria for qualitative synthesis, with five of these suitable for meta-analysis. The studies demonstrated that TENS significantly reduced pain, heart rate, and the requirement for rescue medication in some cases, while also improving patient satisfaction and overall well-being. However, no significant changes were observed in blood pressure. The quality of the included studies varied, with some failing to meet the criteria for blinding and intention-to-treat analysis. TENS is an effective non-pharmacological intervention for pain management in ED settings, with additional benefits such as reduced heart rate and increased patient satisfaction. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are necessary to confirm these findings and better understand the potential of TENS in acute care environments.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) versus sham TENS in adult ED patients with abdominal pain: A clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

There is a growing consensus that the risks of current pharmacologic analgesics warrant consideration of alternative modalities for acute and chronic pain control. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in adult emergency department (ED) patients presenting with abdominal pain.

METHODS

We conducted a patient and observer blinded randomized controlled trial comparing TENS to sham TENS. The study was conducted at a large suburban academic ED. Patients with abdominal pain and a verbal numeric pain scale (VNS) of 5 or greater were randomized to TENS or sham TENS applied via 4 skin pads, one in each abdominal quadrant for 30 min. The primary outcome was change in pain scores 30 min after the intervention. Our study had 80% power to detect a between group difference of 1.5 points on the VNS.

RESULTS

81 patients were randomized to TENS (n = 41) or sham TENS (n = 40). Groups were similar in baseline characteristics. The mean (SD) reductions in pain scores were 1.9 (2.1) and 1.7 (2.6) in patients treated with TENS and sham TENS respectively (P = 0.81). Use of rescue medications in patients with treated with TENS and sham TENS was similar (49 vs 55% respectively, P = 0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

Application of TENS to the abdominal wall did not result in more effective pain relief than sham TENS in adult ED patients with abdominal pain.