Fixed-site high-frequency transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for treatment of chronic low back and lower extremity pain

Objective

The objective of this study was to determine if fixed-site high-frequency transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (FS-TENS) is effective in treating chronic low back and lower extremity pain.

Background

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is widely used for treatment of chronic pain. General-purpose transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation devices are designed for stimulation anywhere on the body and often cannot be used while the user is active or sleeping. FS-TENS devices are designed for placement at a pre-determined location, which enables development of a wearable device for use over extended time periods.

Methods

Study participants with chronic low back and/or lower extremity pain self-administered an FS-TENS device for 60 days. Baseline, 30-, and 60-day follow-up data were obtained through an online questionnaire. The primary outcome measure was the patient global impression of change. Pain intensity and interference were assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory. Changes in use of concomitant pain medications were evaluated with a single-item global self-rating.

Results

One hundred and thirty participants were enrolled, with 88 completing the 60-day follow-up questionnaire. Most participants (73.9%) were 50 years of age or older. At baseline, low back pain was identified by 85.3%, lower extremity pain by 71.6%, and upper extremity pain by 62.5%. Participants reported widespread pain, at baseline, with a mean of 3.4 (standard deviation 1.1) pain sites. At the 60-day follow-up, 80.7% of participants reported that their chronic pain had improved and they were classified as responders. Baseline characteristics did not differentiate non-responders from responders. There were numerical trends toward reduced pain interference with walking ability and sleep, and greater pain relief in responders. There was a large difference in use of concomitant pain medications, with 80.3% of responders reporting a reduction compared to 11.8% of non-responders.

Conclusion

FS-TENS is a safe and effective option for treating chronic low back and lower extremity pain. These results motivate the use of FS-TENS in development of wearable analgesic devices.

Clinical Outcomes of 1 kHz Subperception Spinal Cord Stimulation in Implanted Patients With Failed Paresthesia-Based Stimulation: Results of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Pain relief via spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has historically revolved around producing paresthesia to replace pain, with success measured by the extent of paresthesia-pain overlap. In a recent murine study, by Shechter et al., showed the superior efficacy of high frequency SCS (1 kHz and 10 kHz) at inhibiting the effects of mechanical hypersensitivity compared to sham or 50 Hz stimulation. In the same study, authors report there were no differences in efficacy between 1 kHz and 10 kHz delivered at subperception stimulation strength (80% of motor threshold). Therefore, we designed a randomized, 2 × 2 crossover study of low frequency supra-perception SCS vs. subperception SCS at 1 kHz frequency in order to test whether subperception stimulation at 1 kHz was sufficient to provide effective pain relief in human subjects.

METHODS

Twenty-two subjects with SCS, and inadequate pain relief based on numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) scores (>5) were enrolled, and observed for total of seven weeks (three weeks of treatment, one week wash off, and another three weeks of treatment). Subjects were asked to rate their pain on NPRS as a primary efficacy variable, and complete the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) as secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

Out of 22 subjects that completed the study, 21 subjects (95%) reported improvements in average, best, and worst pain NPRS scores. All NPRS scores were significantly lower with subperception stimulation compared to paresthesia-based stimulation (p < 0.01, p < 0.05, and p < 0.05, respectively). As with NPRS scores, the treatment effect of subperception stimulation was significantly greater than that of paresthesia based stimulation on ODI scores (p = 3.9737 × 10^-5 ) and PGIC scores (p = 3.0396 × 10^-5 ).