Wearable, noninvasive, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy for postoperative analgesia: A randomized, double-masked, sham-controlled pilot study.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Pain Practice Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1111/papr.70007
Brian M Ilfeld, John J Finneran, Engy T Said, Scott T Ball, Anne M Wallace, Ryan C Broderick, Bryan J Sandler, Jay J Doucet, Sandy R Hu, Brannon J Cha, Adhithi Narayana Murthy, Baharin Abdullah
{"title":"Wearable, noninvasive, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy for postoperative analgesia: A randomized, double-masked, sham-controlled pilot study.","authors":"Brian M Ilfeld, John J Finneran, Engy T Said, Scott T Ball, Anne M Wallace, Ryan C Broderick, Bryan J Sandler, Jay J Doucet, Sandy R Hu, Brannon J Cha, Adhithi Narayana Murthy, Baharin Abdullah","doi":"10.1111/papr.70007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy (PSWT) is a nonpharmacologic, noninvasive modality that limited evidence suggests provides analgesia. Its potential favorable risk-benefit ratio stems from its lack of side effects and significant medical risks, applicability to any anatomic location, long treatment duration, and ease of application by simply affixing it with tape. Even with a relatively small treatment effect, PSWT might contribute to a multimodal analgesic regimen, similar to acetaminophen. However, widespread clinical use is hindered by a lack of systematic evidence. The current randomized, controlled pilot study was undertaken to determine the feasibility and optimize the protocol for a subsequent definitive investigation and estimate the treatment effect of PSWT on postoperative pain and opioid consumption.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Within the recovery room following primary knee and hip arthroplasty, cholecystectomy, hernia repair, and non-mastectomy breast surgery, we applied 1-3 PSWT devices (Model 088, BioElectronics Corporation, Frederick, Maryland) over the surgical bandages. Participants were randomized to 28 days of either active or sham treatment in a double-masked fashion. The outcomes of primary interest were the cumulative opioid consumption and the mean of the \"average\" and \"worst\" daily pain measured with the Numeric Rating Scale over the first 7 postoperative days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the first 7 postoperative days, oxycodone consumption in participants given active treatment (n = 55) was a mean (SD) of 21 mg (24) versus 17 mg (26) in patients given sham (n = 57): difference 4 (95% CI, -5 to 13), p = 0.376. During this same period, the \"average\" daily pain intensity in patients given active treatment was 2.4 (1.6) versus 2.6 (1.7) in sham: difference -0.2 (95% CI -0.8 to 0.5), p = 0.597. Concurrently, the worst/maximum pain for the active group was 4.6 (2.0) versus 4.7 (2.1) in sham: difference -0.1 (95% CI -0.8 to 0.7), p = 0.888. No device-related systemic side effects or serious adverse events were identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy did not reduce pain scores and opioid requirements to a statistically significant or clinically relevant degree during the initial postoperative week in this pilot study. These results must be replicated with a subsequent study before being considered definitive. Data from this preliminary study may be used to help plan future trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 2","pages":"e70007"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11744435/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.70007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy (PSWT) is a nonpharmacologic, noninvasive modality that limited evidence suggests provides analgesia. Its potential favorable risk-benefit ratio stems from its lack of side effects and significant medical risks, applicability to any anatomic location, long treatment duration, and ease of application by simply affixing it with tape. Even with a relatively small treatment effect, PSWT might contribute to a multimodal analgesic regimen, similar to acetaminophen. However, widespread clinical use is hindered by a lack of systematic evidence. The current randomized, controlled pilot study was undertaken to determine the feasibility and optimize the protocol for a subsequent definitive investigation and estimate the treatment effect of PSWT on postoperative pain and opioid consumption.

Methods: Within the recovery room following primary knee and hip arthroplasty, cholecystectomy, hernia repair, and non-mastectomy breast surgery, we applied 1-3 PSWT devices (Model 088, BioElectronics Corporation, Frederick, Maryland) over the surgical bandages. Participants were randomized to 28 days of either active or sham treatment in a double-masked fashion. The outcomes of primary interest were the cumulative opioid consumption and the mean of the "average" and "worst" daily pain measured with the Numeric Rating Scale over the first 7 postoperative days.

Results: During the first 7 postoperative days, oxycodone consumption in participants given active treatment (n = 55) was a mean (SD) of 21 mg (24) versus 17 mg (26) in patients given sham (n = 57): difference 4 (95% CI, -5 to 13), p = 0.376. During this same period, the "average" daily pain intensity in patients given active treatment was 2.4 (1.6) versus 2.6 (1.7) in sham: difference -0.2 (95% CI -0.8 to 0.5), p = 0.597. Concurrently, the worst/maximum pain for the active group was 4.6 (2.0) versus 4.7 (2.1) in sham: difference -0.1 (95% CI -0.8 to 0.7), p = 0.888. No device-related systemic side effects or serious adverse events were identified.

Conclusions: Pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy did not reduce pain scores and opioid requirements to a statistically significant or clinically relevant degree during the initial postoperative week in this pilot study. These results must be replicated with a subsequent study before being considered definitive. Data from this preliminary study may be used to help plan future trials.

可穿戴、无创、脉冲短波(射频)治疗术后镇痛:一项随机、双盲、假对照的初步研究。
背景:非热、脉冲短波(射频)治疗(PSWT)是一种非药物、无创的治疗方式,有限的证据表明它能起到镇痛作用。其潜在的良好风险效益比源于其无副作用和显著的医疗风险,适用于任何解剖部位,治疗时间长,只需用胶带粘贴即可使用。即使治疗效果相对较小,PSWT也可能有助于多模式镇痛方案,类似于对乙酰氨基酚。然而,由于缺乏系统的证据,广泛的临床应用受到阻碍。目前进行的随机对照试点研究是为了确定可行性并优化方案,以进行后续的明确调查,并评估PSWT对术后疼痛和阿片类药物消耗的治疗效果。方法:在初级膝关节和髋关节置换术、胆囊切除术、疝修补术和非乳房切除术后的恢复室内,我们在手术绷带上应用了1-3个PSWT装置(型号088,BioElectronics Corporation, Frederick, Maryland)。参与者被随机分为28天的积极或虚假治疗,以双重掩盖的方式。主要关注的结果是阿片类药物的累积消耗以及术后前7天用数字评定量表测量的“平均”和“最严重”每日疼痛的平均值。结果:术后前7天,接受积极治疗的患者(n = 55)的氧可酮消耗量平均(SD)为21 mg(24),而接受假治疗的患者(n = 57)的氧可酮消耗量为17 mg(26):差异为4 (95% CI, -5至13),p = 0.376。在同一时期,接受积极治疗的患者的“平均”每日疼痛强度为2.4(1.6),而接受假治疗的患者为2.6(1.7):差异为-0.2 (95% CI -0.8至0.5),p = 0.597。同时,活动组的最大/最差疼痛为4.6(2.0),而假手术组为4.7(2.1):差异为-0.1 (95% CI -0.8 ~ 0.7), p = 0.888。未发现与器械相关的全身副作用或严重不良事件。结论:在这项初步研究中,脉冲短波(射频)治疗在术后最初一周内并没有将疼痛评分和阿片类药物需求降低到统计学显著或临床相关的程度。这些结果必须在随后的研究中得到证实,才能被认为是决定性的。这项初步研究的数据可用于帮助计划未来的试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain Practice
Pain Practice ANESTHESIOLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
92
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pain Practice, the official journal of the World Institute of Pain, publishes international multidisciplinary articles on pain and analgesia that provide its readership with up-to-date research, evaluation methods, and techniques for pain management. Special sections including the Consultant’s Corner, Images in Pain Practice, Case Studies from Mayo, Tutorials, and the Evidence-Based Medicine combine to give pain researchers, pain clinicians and pain fellows in training a systematic approach to continuing education in pain medicine. Prior to publication, all articles and reviews undergo peer review by at least two experts in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信