Ayla Nohemi Colmenarez Espinoza, Pâmela Maria Moreira, Filipe Teruo Yamada, Camila Pereira Meira, Luís Henrique Paladini, Ana Carolina Brandt de Macedo
{"title":"两种模式短波热疗治疗慢性腰痛的即时效果:随机对照临床试验。","authors":"Ayla Nohemi Colmenarez Espinoza, Pâmela Maria Moreira, Filipe Teruo Yamada, Camila Pereira Meira, Luís Henrique Paladini, Ana Carolina Brandt de Macedo","doi":"10.1080/17581869.2025.2570117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>evaluate the immediate results of short-wave diathermy (SWD) in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>individuals with CLBP, aged between 18 and 80, of both sexes, were selected for a double-blind, 3-arm, randomized, and controlled trial. The outcomes assessed were: pain by Numeric Rating Scale for pain (NRS), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT); disability; strength and power of lower limbs and flexibility of spine and lower limbs. The participants were randomized into three groups: continuous SWD (cSWD, <i>n</i> = 50), pulsed SWD (pSWD, <i>n</i> = 50), and placebo group (PG, <i>n</i> = 50). All groups received a single application of SWD for 30 mins and underwent assessment at three stages: pre-intervention, post-intervention, and follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>we found a significant difference between cSWD and PG in NRS (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Only pSWD showed a significant intergroup difference with PG in sensory and total MPQ index (<i>p</i> < 0.05). There were improvements in intra-group disability in pSWD and PG, in flexibility only in cSWD, and the power of lower limb post-intervention only in pSWD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SWD endowed an immediate analgesic effect in individuals with CLBP.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>The www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-2k58f5h/ identifier is RBR- 2k58f5h.</p>","PeriodicalId":20000,"journal":{"name":"Pain management","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immediate effects of two modes of shortwave diathermy in chronic low back pain: randomized controlled clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Ayla Nohemi Colmenarez Espinoza, Pâmela Maria Moreira, Filipe Teruo Yamada, Camila Pereira Meira, Luís Henrique Paladini, Ana Carolina Brandt de Macedo\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17581869.2025.2570117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>evaluate the immediate results of short-wave diathermy (SWD) in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>individuals with CLBP, aged between 18 and 80, of both sexes, were selected for a double-blind, 3-arm, randomized, and controlled trial. The outcomes assessed were: pain by Numeric Rating Scale for pain (NRS), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT); disability; strength and power of lower limbs and flexibility of spine and lower limbs. The participants were randomized into three groups: continuous SWD (cSWD, <i>n</i> = 50), pulsed SWD (pSWD, <i>n</i> = 50), and placebo group (PG, <i>n</i> = 50). All groups received a single application of SWD for 30 mins and underwent assessment at three stages: pre-intervention, post-intervention, and follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>we found a significant difference between cSWD and PG in NRS (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Only pSWD showed a significant intergroup difference with PG in sensory and total MPQ index (<i>p</i> < 0.05). There were improvements in intra-group disability in pSWD and PG, in flexibility only in cSWD, and the power of lower limb post-intervention only in pSWD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SWD endowed an immediate analgesic effect in individuals with CLBP.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>The www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-2k58f5h/ identifier is RBR- 2k58f5h.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain management\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-04\",\"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/10.1080/17581869.2025.2570117\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17581869.2025.2570117","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
摘要
目的:评估短波热疗(SWD)对慢性腰痛(CLBP)患者的直接效果。材料和方法:CLBP患者,年龄在18 - 80岁,男女不限,进行双盲、三组、随机对照试验。评估的结果是:通过疼痛数值评定量表(NRS)、McGill疼痛问卷(MPQ)和压痛阈值(PPT)评估疼痛;残疾;下肢的力量和力量以及脊柱和下肢的柔韧性。参与者被随机分为三组:连续SWD (cSWD, n = 50),脉冲SWD (pSWD, n = 50)和安慰剂组(PG, n = 50)。所有组均接受30分钟的单一社会福利服务,并分三个阶段进行评估:干预前、干预后和随访。结果:我们发现cSWD和PG在NRS方面存在显著差异(p p)。结论:SWD对CLBP患者具有即时镇痛作用。临床试验注册:www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-2k58f5h/标识符为RBR-2k58f5h。
Immediate effects of two modes of shortwave diathermy in chronic low back pain: randomized controlled clinical trial.
Aim: evaluate the immediate results of short-wave diathermy (SWD) in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP).
Materials and methods: individuals with CLBP, aged between 18 and 80, of both sexes, were selected for a double-blind, 3-arm, randomized, and controlled trial. The outcomes assessed were: pain by Numeric Rating Scale for pain (NRS), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and Pressure Pain Threshold (PPT); disability; strength and power of lower limbs and flexibility of spine and lower limbs. The participants were randomized into three groups: continuous SWD (cSWD, n = 50), pulsed SWD (pSWD, n = 50), and placebo group (PG, n = 50). All groups received a single application of SWD for 30 mins and underwent assessment at three stages: pre-intervention, post-intervention, and follow-up.
Results: we found a significant difference between cSWD and PG in NRS (p < 0.05). Only pSWD showed a significant intergroup difference with PG in sensory and total MPQ index (p < 0.05). There were improvements in intra-group disability in pSWD and PG, in flexibility only in cSWD, and the power of lower limb post-intervention only in pSWD.
Conclusions: SWD endowed an immediate analgesic effect in individuals with CLBP.
Clinical trial registration: The www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-2k58f5h/ identifier is RBR- 2k58f5h.