Efficacy of Rebox Electrotherapy in Pain Management: A Randomized Double-Blind Sham-Controlled Crossover Trial.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Pain and Therapy Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-09-03 DOI:10.1007/s40122-025-00768-w
Igor Martuliak, Ľuboš Chvála, Miroslav Ferenčík, Vratislav Fabián, Matěj Slovák
{"title":"Efficacy of Rebox Electrotherapy in Pain Management: A Randomized Double-Blind Sham-Controlled Crossover Trial.","authors":"Igor Martuliak, Ľuboš Chvála, Miroslav Ferenčík, Vratislav Fabián, Matěj Slovák","doi":"10.1007/s40122-025-00768-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Rebox therapy is a form of noninvasive transcutaneous electrotherapy, which delivers microcurrent kilohertz-frequency pulses in multiple points over the target area. Despite decades of use in pain management, clinical evidence supporting Rebox remains inconclusive, with a lack of rigorous sham-controlled trials. This study aimed to evaluate its analgesic effect in a single-center, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled crossover trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included consecutive patients with non-cancer nociceptive pain with average pain intensity ≥ 4 on a numerical rating scale (NRS), and pain duration of 2-12 weeks (de novo or acutely exacerbated chronic pain). Patients were randomized (1:1) into two arms based on the sequence of stimulation periods. Each period consisted of eight sessions of either Rebox or sham treatment, administered every other working day, with a 1-week washout period. The primary outcome was the difference in the reduction of pain intensity (average and worst pain in the last 24 h) following active versus sham stimulation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-one patients completed the study, with musculoskeletal back pain being the most common indication (n = 60). Compared to the sham, Rebox significantly reduced both average pain (NRS difference: 2.2, 95% CI 0.8-3.6, Cohen's d = 0.75, p = 0.002) and worst pain (NRS difference: 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-3.5, Cohen's d = 0.91, p < 0.001). A significant placebo analgesic effect was observed only in the sham-first arm. The treatment was well tolerated, with only minor and transient side effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Rebox demonstrated a significant analgesic effect compared to the sham. The treatment was safe and well tolerated. These findings support integrating Rebox into clinical pain management, warranting further investigation in larger trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":19908,"journal":{"name":"Pain and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1597-1610"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12484431/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-025-00768-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Rebox therapy is a form of noninvasive transcutaneous electrotherapy, which delivers microcurrent kilohertz-frequency pulses in multiple points over the target area. Despite decades of use in pain management, clinical evidence supporting Rebox remains inconclusive, with a lack of rigorous sham-controlled trials. This study aimed to evaluate its analgesic effect in a single-center, randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled crossover trial.

Methods: The study included consecutive patients with non-cancer nociceptive pain with average pain intensity ≥ 4 on a numerical rating scale (NRS), and pain duration of 2-12 weeks (de novo or acutely exacerbated chronic pain). Patients were randomized (1:1) into two arms based on the sequence of stimulation periods. Each period consisted of eight sessions of either Rebox or sham treatment, administered every other working day, with a 1-week washout period. The primary outcome was the difference in the reduction of pain intensity (average and worst pain in the last 24 h) following active versus sham stimulation.

Results: Seventy-one patients completed the study, with musculoskeletal back pain being the most common indication (n = 60). Compared to the sham, Rebox significantly reduced both average pain (NRS difference: 2.2, 95% CI 0.8-3.6, Cohen's d = 0.75, p = 0.002) and worst pain (NRS difference: 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-3.5, Cohen's d = 0.91, p < 0.001). A significant placebo analgesic effect was observed only in the sham-first arm. The treatment was well tolerated, with only minor and transient side effects.

Conclusion: Rebox demonstrated a significant analgesic effect compared to the sham. The treatment was safe and well tolerated. These findings support integrating Rebox into clinical pain management, warranting further investigation in larger trials.

Rebox电疗治疗疼痛的疗效:一项随机双盲假对照交叉试验。
Rebox疗法是一种非侵入性经皮电疗,它在目标区域的多个点上传递微电流千赫兹频率脉冲。尽管在疼痛管理中使用了几十年,但支持Rebox的临床证据仍然不确定,缺乏严格的假对照试验。本研究旨在通过单中心、随机、双盲、假对照交叉试验评价其镇痛效果。方法:研究纳入连续非癌性伤害性疼痛患者,平均疼痛强度≥4 (NRS),疼痛持续时间为2-12周(新发或急性加重慢性疼痛)。根据刺激周期的顺序将患者随机分为两组(1:1)。每个阶段包括8次Rebox或假治疗,每隔一个工作日进行一次,洗脱期为1周。主要结果是主动刺激与假刺激后疼痛强度(最后24小时内的平均疼痛和最严重疼痛)减轻的差异。结果:71名患者完成了研究,肌肉骨骼背痛是最常见的适应症(n = 60)。与假手术相比,Rebox显著降低了平均疼痛(NRS差值:2.2,95% CI 0.8-3.6, Cohen’s d = 0.75, p = 0.002)和最严重疼痛(NRS差值:2.3,95% CI 1.2-3.5, Cohen’s d = 0.91, p)。结论:与假手术相比,Rebox具有显著的镇痛作用。这种治疗是安全且耐受性良好的。这些发现支持将Rebox整合到临床疼痛管理中,值得在更大规模的试验中进一步研究。
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 and Therapy
Pain and Therapy CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
110
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Pain and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of pain therapies and pain-related devices. Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, acute pain, cancer pain, chronic pain, headache and migraine, neuropathic pain, opioids, palliative care and pain ethics, peri- and post-operative pain as well as rheumatic pain and fibromyalgia. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports, trial protocols, short communications such as commentaries and editorials, and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from around the world. Pain and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信