Microwave diathermy and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation effects in primary dysmenorrhea: clinical trial protocol

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain control in women with primary dysmenorrhoea

BACKGROUND

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a non-pharmacological treatment that works by delivering electrical currents via electrodes attached to the skin at the site of pain. It can be an alternative to pharmacological treatments. The mechanism of action of TENS for pain relief is related to the inhibition of the transmission of painful stimuli, release of endogenous opioids, and reduced muscle ischaemia of the uterus. Although it has been used for primary dysmenorrhoea ((PD); period pain or menstrual cramps), evidence of the efficacy and safety of high-frequency TENS, low-frequency TENS, or other treatments for PD is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in comparison with placebo, no treatment, and other treatments for primary dysmenorrhoea (PD).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Gynaecology and Fertility Group's Specialized Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, and the Korean and Chinese language databases up to 9 April 2024. We also searched for ongoing trials in trials registries and the reference lists of relevant studies for additional trials. Language restrictions were not applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included women (aged 12 to 49 years) with PD. Included trials compared low-frequency TENS or high-frequency TENS with other TENS, placebo, or other treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors screened the trials, extracted the data according to the protocol, assessed the risk of bias using RoB 2, and assessed the certainty of evidence for all review comparisons and primary outcomes (i.e. pain relief and adverse effects) using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This review replaces the current review, published in 2009. We included 20 RCTs involving 585 randomized women with high-frequency TENS, low-frequency TENS, placebo or no treatment, or other treatment. We included five comparisons: high-frequency TENS versus placebo or no treatment, low-frequency TENS versus placebo or no treatment, high-frequency TENS versus low-frequency TENS, high-frequency TENS versus other treatments, and low-frequency TENS versus other treatments. High-frequency TENS versus placebo or no treatment High-frequency TENS may reduce pain compared with placebo or no treatment (mean difference (MD) -1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.51 to -0.28; 10 RCTs, 345 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 88%). Two out of three RCTs reported no adverse effects and hence we were unable to estimate the effect of high-frequency TENS on adverse effects. Low-frequency TENS versus placebo or no treatment Low-frequency TENS may reduce pain compared with placebo or no treatment (MD -2.04, 95% CI -2.95 to -1.14; 3 RCTs, 645 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 0%). No trials reported adverse effects for this comparison. High-frequency TENS versus low-frequency TENS It is uncertain whether high-frequency TENS had an effect on pain relief compared with low-frequency TENS (MD 0.89, 95% CI -0.19 to 1.96; 3 RCTs, 54 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 0%). One trial contributed data on adverse effects but no adverse events occurred. High-frequency TENS versus other treatments It is uncertain whether high-frequency TENS had an effect on pain relief compared to acupressure (MD -0.66, 95% CI -1.72 to 0.40; 1 RCT, 18 women; very low-certainty evidence), acetaminophen (paracetamol) (MD -0.98, 95% CI -3.30 to 1.34; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence), and interferential current therapy (MD -0.03, 95% CI -1.04 to 0.98; 2 RCTs, 62 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 0%). The occurrence of adverse effects may not differ significantly between high-frequency TENS and NSAIDs (OR 12.06, 95% CI 0.26 to 570.62; 2 RCTs, 88 women; low-certainty evidence; I2 = 78%). Low-frequency TENS versus other treatments It is uncertain whether low-frequency TENS had an effect on pain relief compared with acetaminophen (MD -1.48, 95% CI -3.61 to 0.65; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported adverse effects for this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-frequency TENS and low-frequency TENS may reduce pain compared with placebo or no treatment. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because of the risk of bias. Future RCTs should focus more on secondary outcomes of this review (e.g. requirement for additional analgesics, limitation of daily activities, or health-related quality of life) and should be designed to ensure a low risk of bias.

Comparison of the effectiveness of connective tissue massage and myofascial release technique in young adult women with primary dysmenorrhea

Background/Aim: Dysmenorrhea can restrict daily living activities and the overall productivity of women, thereby negatively affecting quality of life and causing absenteeism in students and loss of workdays in working women. Medical treatment is frequently used in clinics, but alternative approaches are needed when currently available treatment options are not effective. The aim of this study is to investigate and compare the acute effects of two manipulative methods, connective tissue massage (CTM) and myofascial release technique (MRT), on menstrual pain, fatigue, pain threshold, and menstrual symptoms in young adult women with primary dysmenorrhea (PD). Methods: Forty young adults diagnosed with PD and scoring ≥4 in menstrual pain intensity according to the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were included in the study. Menstrual pain and fatigue severity was evaluated by using VAS, pain threshold by algometer device from six unique points, and menstrual symptom severity using the Menstrual Symptom Questionnaire. Participants were randomly divided into two groups and evaluated in their first menstrual cycles. In Group 1, 10 sessions of CTM were applied between the first and second menstrual cycles, and in Group 2, a single session of MRT was applied on the most painful day of the second menstrual cycle. After the application, all participants were re-evaluated on the most painful day of their second menstrual cycles. Results: No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of age, BMI, menarche age, menstrual cycle, and menstrual bleeding duration. In both groups, a significant decrease was found in pain, fatigue, and menstrual symptom severity, and a significant increase was found in pain threshold (P=0.001). MRT was found to be more effective at improving the pain threshold at all points except the first point (1st point P=0.098, 2nd point P=0.034, 3rd point P=0.037, 4th point P=0.041, 5th point P=0.009, 6th point P=0.001). Conclusion: It was found that CTM and MRT were effective at improving pain, fatigue, pain threshold, and menstrual symptoms in PD, and MRT was found to be more effective at increasing pain thresholds compared to CTM.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for women with primary dysmenorrhea: Study protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial with economic evaluation

Primary dysmenorrhea (PD) is a common gynecological disorder characterized by cramping pain in the lower abdomen during menstruation, in the absence of identifiable pathology. While Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) is used to promote PD pain relief, there is still a need to understand the parameters and cost-effectiveness of this intervention. As such, this study aims to disclose a study that will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of TENS on pain intensity in women with PD. This is a protocol for an assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial that includes 174 women with PD, >18 years old, with menstrual pain greater than or equal to four points in the Numerical Rating Scale. Participants will be randomized into three groups (active TENS, placebo TENS, and educational booklet). Participants allocated to the active TENS group will receive electrical stimulation (F = 100 Hz, pulse duration = 200 μs, for 30 min). In contrast, the placebo TENS group will receive placebo stimulation (same parameters, but for only 30 s, and then the current will be ramped off over a 15-s time frame) for three consecutive months during menstruation. Participants allocated to the educational booklet group will receive instructions about health promotion and education actions related to PD. A blinded assessor will evaluate the pain intensity (Numerical Rating Scale), presenteeism (Stanford Presenteeism Scale), Health-Related Quality of Life (Short-Form 6 dimensions and SF-36), and health costs of menstrual pain. This is the first study to propose a health economic evaluation while assessing the benefits of using TENS to treat PD symptoms. It is hypothesized that active TENS will be more effective than placebo TENS or the educational booklet in improving clinical outcomes in the short-, medium- and long-term. The study will also provide information about the cost-effectiveness of TENS, which can be used by policy makers to improve PD care in public and private health systems.

Inflammatory Markers in Dysmenorrhea and Therapeutic Options

Dysmenorrhea often significantly reduces the quality of women's life and is still an important public health problem. Despite numerous studies, the pathomechanism of dysmenorrhea is not fully understood. Previous research indicates the complexity of biochemical reactions between the endocrine, vascular, and immune systems. Prostaglandins play a major role in the pathomechanism of dysmenorrhea. In contrast, cytokines and other proinflammatory factors in primary dysmenorrhea are less studied. In addition to the applied pharmacotherapy, more and more studies proving the effectiveness of non-pharmacological methods appear. Therefore, the present work contains a review of the latest research concerning factors involved in dysmenorrhea, as well as therapeutic options. In the literature search, authors used online databases, PubMed, and clinitrials.gov and browsed through individual gynecology, physiotherapy journals and books.

Effects of thermotherapy and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on patients with primary dysmenorrhea: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of thermotherapy and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on pain intensity, pressure pain threshold (PPT) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM) in patients with primary dysmenorrhea (PD).

DESIGN

A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial.

SETTING

Physiotherapy Department of the Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, São Paulo (Brazil).

INTERVENTIONS

Eighty-eight dysmenorrheic women were randomly allocated into four groups: Thermotherapy + TENS(n = 22), Thermotherapy(n = 22), TENS(n = 22) and Placebo(n = 22). Thermotherapy was applied by microwave diathermy (20 min), and TENS (200 μs, 100 Hz, 30 min), into the lower abdomen both.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain intensity was measured using the numeric rating scale (NRS) and the McGill Pain Questionnaire (Br-MPQ). PPT and CPM were recorded from women's abdominal and lumbar. The evaluation was done in 5 times: baseline, after 20, 50, 110 min and 24 h from intervention.

RESULTS

There was a significant decrease in the NRS for Thermotherapy + TENS vs. TENS, for Thermotherapy vs. TENS and for Placebo, after 20 min; for Thermotherapy vs. TENS and for Placebo, after 110 min and 24 h. Abdome PPT increased in the Thermotherapy + TENS vs. TENS and Placebo, after 50 min; for Thermotherapy + TENS vs. Placebo and for Thermotherapy vs. Placebo, after 110 min. No changes in lumbar PPT and CPM were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of thermotherapy reduced NRS compared to the TENS and Placebo after 20, 110 min and 24 h. Thermotherapy demonstrated an increase in the PPT in the abdomen after 50 and 110 min and decreased the Br-MPQ scores after 110 min in patients with PD.

Heat therapy for primary dysmenorrhea: A systematic review and meta-analysis of its effects on pain relief and quality of life

Primary dysmenorrhea, which is menstrual pain without pelvic pathology, is the most common gynecologic condition in women. Heat therapy has been used as a treatment. We assessed the evidence on heat therapy as a treatment for primary dysmenorrhea. We searched 11 databases for studies published through July 2018. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that addressed heat therapy for patients with primary dysmenorrhea were included. Data extraction and risk-of-bias assessments were performed by two independent reviewers. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Six RCTs met our inclusion criteria. Two RCTs found favorable effects of heat therapy on menstrual pain compared with unheated placebo therapy. Three RCTs found favorable effects of heating pads on menstrual pain compared with analgesic medication (n = 274; SMD −0.72; 95% confidence interval −0.97 to −0.48; P < 0.001; two studies). One RCT showed beneficial effects of heat therapy on menstrual pain compared with no treatment (n = 132; MD −4.04 VAS; 95% CI −4.88 to −3.20; P < 0.001). However, these results are based on relatively few trials with small sample sizes. Our review provided suggestive evidence of the effectiveness of heat therapy for primary dysmenorrhea, but rigorous high-quality trials are still needed to provide robust evidence.