4.5 Review

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for postoperative pain control after total knee arthroplasty A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Journal

MEDICINE
Volume 96, Issue 37, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008036

Keywords

meta-analysis; pain control; total knee arthroplasty; transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficiency and safety of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain control after total knee arthroplasty. Methods: A systematic search was performed in Medline (1966 to June 2017), PubMed (1966 to June 2017), Embase (1980 to June 2017), ScienceDirect (1985 to June 2017), and the Cochrane Library. Only randomized controlled trial (RCT) was included. The fixed/random effect model was used according to the heterogeneity tested by I-2 statistic. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 11.0 software. Results: Five RCTs including 472 patients met the inclusion criteria. The present meta-analysis indicated that there were significant differences between groups in terms of visual analogue scale score at 12hours (average: 3.58 vs 4.34, SMD= -0.260, 95% CI: -0.442 to -0.078, P=.005), 24hours (average: 3.18 vs 3.52, SMD= -0.244, 95% CI: -0.426 to -0.063, P=.008), and 48hours (average: 2.70 vs 2.96, SMD= -0.214, 95% CI: -0.395 to -0.033, P=.021) after total knee arthroplasty. Significant differences were found regarding opioid consumption at 12hours (average: 14.44 vs 18.54, SMD= -0.503, 95% CI: -0.687 to -0.319, P=.000), 24hours (average: 16.10 vs 18.40, SMD= -0.262, 95% CI: -0.443 to -0.080, P=.005), and 48hours (average: 12.92 vs 15.12, SMD= -0.183, 95% CI: -0.364 to -0.002, P=.048). Conclusion: TENS could significantly reduce pain and opioid consumption after total knee arthroplasty. In addition, there were fewer adverse effects in the TENS groups. Higher quality RCTs are required for further research.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available