Natiele Camponogara Righi, Richard Eloin Liebano, Mark I Johnson, Mary Cimen, Rodrigo Della Méa Plentz
{"title":"Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in complex regional pain syndrome: a systematic review.","authors":"Natiele Camponogara Righi, Richard Eloin Liebano, Mark I Johnson, Mary Cimen, Rodrigo Della Méa Plentz","doi":"10.1080/17581869.2025.2529150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) causes disabling pain. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a treatment option. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the effects of TENS in patients with CRPS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and PEDro databases up to June 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with CRPS that evaluated the effects of TENS, regardless of parameters used, on pain intensity were considered eligible. Comparator groups could include placebo, usual care, or no intervention. Two independent reviewers extracted data, and a descriptive synthesis was performed. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 517 records screened, only two clinical trials met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a total of 38 participants (58% women). One study reported improvements in pain, mobility, and edema with conventional TENS compared to sham TENS. The other was a feasibility study that did not reach its recruitment target and presented only individual-level data without between-group comparisons. The assessment of the risk of bias revealed some concern about clarity of reporting of data analysis in both studies and the absence of protocol registration in one.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was insufficient evidence to judge the efficacy of TENS for analgesic and function improvement in patients with CRPS. Further studies are needed to inform clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Systematic review: </strong>registration number CRD42024554290.</p>","PeriodicalId":20000,"journal":{"name":"Pain management","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17581869.2025.2529150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) causes disabling pain. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a treatment option. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the effects of TENS in patients with CRPS.
Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and PEDro databases up to June 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with CRPS that evaluated the effects of TENS, regardless of parameters used, on pain intensity were considered eligible. Comparator groups could include placebo, usual care, or no intervention. Two independent reviewers extracted data, and a descriptive synthesis was performed. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool.
Results: Of the 517 records screened, only two clinical trials met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a total of 38 participants (58% women). One study reported improvements in pain, mobility, and edema with conventional TENS compared to sham TENS. The other was a feasibility study that did not reach its recruitment target and presented only individual-level data without between-group comparisons. The assessment of the risk of bias revealed some concern about clarity of reporting of data analysis in both studies and the absence of protocol registration in one.
Conclusion: There was insufficient evidence to judge the efficacy of TENS for analgesic and function improvement in patients with CRPS. Further studies are needed to inform clinical decision-making.
Systematic review: registration number CRD42024554290.
复杂区域疼痛综合征（CRPS）引起致残疼痛。经皮神经电刺激（TENS）是一种治疗选择。本系统综述的目的是评估TENS在CRPS患者中的效果。方法：系统检索截至2025年6月的PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane CENTRAL、Web of Science和PEDro数据库。随机对照试验（rct）纳入CRPS患者，评估TENS对疼痛强度的影响，无论使用的参数如何，均被认为是合格的。比较组可以包括安慰剂、常规护理或不干预。两名独立审稿人提取数据，并进行描述性综合。使用RoB 2工具评估偏倚风险。结果：在筛选的517项记录中，只有两项临床试验符合纳入标准，总共包括38名参与者（58%为女性）。一项研究报告了与假TENS相比，常规TENS在疼痛、活动能力和水肿方面的改善。另一个是可行性研究，没有达到招聘目标，只提供了个人层面的数据，没有组间比较。对偏倚风险的评估显示了对两项研究中数据分析报告的清晰度和一项研究中缺少方案注册的一些担忧。结论：目前尚没有足够的证据来判断TENS对CRPS患者镇痛和功能改善的效果。需要进一步的研究来为临床决策提供信息。系统评审：注册号CRD42024554290。
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
