Interferential therapy electrode placement technique in acute low back pain: A preliminary investigation

D.A. Hurley, P.M. Minder, S.M. McDonough, D.M. Walsh, A. Moore, D.G. Baxter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To determine the efficacy of interferential therapy (IFT) electrode placement technique compared with a control treatment in subjects with acute low back pain (LBP). Design: Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial with a 3-month follow-up. Setting: Outpatient physiotherapy departments in hospital and university settings. Patients: A random sample of 60 eligible patients with back pain (28 men, 32 women) were recruited by general practitioners and self-referral for physiotherapy treatment and randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups. Interventions: (1) “IFT painful area” and The Back Book, (2) “IFT spinal nerve” and The Back Book, and (3) “Control,” The Back Book only. Standardized IFT stimulation parameters were used: carrier frequency 3.85kHz; 140Hz constant; pulse duration 130μs; 30 minutes' duration. Main Outcome Measures: Pain Rating Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and EuroQol were completed by subjects pretreatment, at discharge, and 3-month follow-up. Results: All groups had significant improvements in all outcomes at follow-up. Subjects managed by IFT spinal nerve and The Back Book displayed both a statistically significant (p = .030) and clinically meaningful reduction in functional disability (RMDQ), compared with management via IFT painful area and The Back Book combined or The Back Book alone. Conclusions: The findings showed that IFT electrode placement technique affects LBP-specific functional disability, providing preliminary implications for future clinical studies.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)485-493
Number of pages9
JournalArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume82
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2001

Fingerprint

Low Back Pain
Electrodes
Spinal Nerves
Therapeutics
Hospital Departments
Back Pain
General Practitioners
Outpatients
Referral and Consultation
Randomized Controlled Trials
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Pain

Cite this

Hurley, D.A. ; Minder, P.M. ; McDonough, S.M. ; Walsh, D.M. ; Moore, A. ; Baxter, D.G. / Interferential therapy electrode placement technique in acute low back pain: A preliminary investigation. In: Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2001 ; Vol. 82, No. 4. pp. 485-493.
@article{1b0dd2c474bb4166b4115c6a7134485c,
title = "Interferential therapy electrode placement technique in acute low back pain: A preliminary investigation",
abstract = "Objective: To determine the efficacy of interferential therapy (IFT) electrode placement technique compared with a control treatment in subjects with acute low back pain (LBP). Design: Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial with a 3-month follow-up. Setting: Outpatient physiotherapy departments in hospital and university settings. Patients: A random sample of 60 eligible patients with back pain (28 men, 32 women) were recruited by general practitioners and self-referral for physiotherapy treatment and randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups. Interventions: (1) “IFT painful area” and The Back Book, (2) “IFT spinal nerve” and The Back Book, and (3) “Control,” The Back Book only. Standardized IFT stimulation parameters were used: carrier frequency 3.85kHz; 140Hz constant; pulse duration 130μs; 30 minutes' duration. Main Outcome Measures: Pain Rating Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and EuroQol were completed by subjects pretreatment, at discharge, and 3-month follow-up. Results: All groups had significant improvements in all outcomes at follow-up. Subjects managed by IFT spinal nerve and The Back Book displayed both a statistically significant (p = .030) and clinically meaningful reduction in functional disability (RMDQ), compared with management via IFT painful area and The Back Book combined or The Back Book alone. Conclusions: The findings showed that IFT electrode placement technique affects LBP-specific functional disability, providing preliminary implications for future clinical studies.",
author = "D.A. Hurley and P.M. Minder and S.M. McDonough and D.M. Walsh and A. Moore and D.G. Baxter",
year = "2001",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1053/apmr.2001.21934",
language = "English",
volume = "82",
pages = "485--493",
journal = "Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation",
issn = "0003-9993",
number = "4",

}

Interferential therapy electrode placement technique in acute low back pain: A preliminary investigation. / Hurley, D.A.; Minder, P.M.; McDonough, S.M.; Walsh, D.M.; Moore, A.; Baxter, D.G.

In: Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Vol. 82, No. 4, 04.2001, p. 485-493.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interferential therapy electrode placement technique in acute low back pain: A preliminary investigation

AU - Hurley, D.A.

AU - Minder, P.M.

AU - McDonough, S.M.

AU - Walsh, D.M.

AU - Moore, A.

AU - Baxter, D.G.

PY - 2001/4

Y1 - 2001/4

N2 - Objective: To determine the efficacy of interferential therapy (IFT) electrode placement technique compared with a control treatment in subjects with acute low back pain (LBP). Design: Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial with a 3-month follow-up. Setting: Outpatient physiotherapy departments in hospital and university settings. Patients: A random sample of 60 eligible patients with back pain (28 men, 32 women) were recruited by general practitioners and self-referral for physiotherapy treatment and randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups. Interventions: (1) “IFT painful area” and The Back Book, (2) “IFT spinal nerve” and The Back Book, and (3) “Control,” The Back Book only. Standardized IFT stimulation parameters were used: carrier frequency 3.85kHz; 140Hz constant; pulse duration 130μs; 30 minutes' duration. Main Outcome Measures: Pain Rating Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and EuroQol were completed by subjects pretreatment, at discharge, and 3-month follow-up. Results: All groups had significant improvements in all outcomes at follow-up. Subjects managed by IFT spinal nerve and The Back Book displayed both a statistically significant (p = .030) and clinically meaningful reduction in functional disability (RMDQ), compared with management via IFT painful area and The Back Book combined or The Back Book alone. Conclusions: The findings showed that IFT electrode placement technique affects LBP-specific functional disability, providing preliminary implications for future clinical studies.

AB - Objective: To determine the efficacy of interferential therapy (IFT) electrode placement technique compared with a control treatment in subjects with acute low back pain (LBP). Design: Single-blind, randomized, controlled trial with a 3-month follow-up. Setting: Outpatient physiotherapy departments in hospital and university settings. Patients: A random sample of 60 eligible patients with back pain (28 men, 32 women) were recruited by general practitioners and self-referral for physiotherapy treatment and randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups. Interventions: (1) “IFT painful area” and The Back Book, (2) “IFT spinal nerve” and The Back Book, and (3) “Control,” The Back Book only. Standardized IFT stimulation parameters were used: carrier frequency 3.85kHz; 140Hz constant; pulse duration 130μs; 30 minutes' duration. Main Outcome Measures: Pain Rating Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and EuroQol were completed by subjects pretreatment, at discharge, and 3-month follow-up. Results: All groups had significant improvements in all outcomes at follow-up. Subjects managed by IFT spinal nerve and The Back Book displayed both a statistically significant (p = .030) and clinically meaningful reduction in functional disability (RMDQ), compared with management via IFT painful area and The Back Book combined or The Back Book alone. Conclusions: The findings showed that IFT electrode placement technique affects LBP-specific functional disability, providing preliminary implications for future clinical studies.

U2 - 10.1053/apmr.2001.21934

DO - 10.1053/apmr.2001.21934

M3 - Article

VL - 82

SP - 485

EP - 493

JO - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

JF - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

SN - 0003-9993

IS - 4

ER -