SUMMARY: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a nonpharmacological intervention that activates a complex neuronal network to reduce pain by activating descending inhibitory systems in the central nervous system to reduce hyperalgesia. The evidence for TENS efficacy is conflicting and requires not only description but also critique. Population-specific systemic reviews and meta-analyses are emerging, indicating both HF and LF TENS being shown to provide analgesia, specifically when applied at a strong, nonpainful intensity. The purpose of this article is to provide a critical review of the latest basic science and clinical evidence for TENS. Additional research is necessary to determine if TENS has effects specific to mechanical stimuli and/or beyond reduction of pain and will improve activity levels, function and quality of life.

Because transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) works by reducing central excitability and activating central inhibition pathways, we tested the hypothesis that TENS would reduce pain and fatigue and improve function and hyperalgesia in people with fibromyalgia who have enhanced central excitability and reduced inhibition. The current study used a double-blinded randomized, placebo-controlled cross-over design to test the effects of a single treatment of TENS with people with fibromyalgia. Three treatments were assessed in random order: active TENS, placebo TENS and no TENS. The following measures were assessed before and after each TENS treatment: pain and fatigue at rest and in movement; pressure pain thresholds, 6-m walk test, range of motion; 5-time sit-to-stand test, and single-leg stance. Conditioned pain modulation was completed at the end of testing. There was a significant decrease in pain and fatigue with movement for active TENS compared to placebo and no TENS. Pressure pain thresholds increased at the site of TENS (spine) and outside the site of TENS (leg) when compared to placebo TENS or no TENS. During active TENS, conditioned pain modulation was significantly stronger compared to placebo TENS and no TENS. No changes in functional tasks were observed with TENS. Thus, the current study suggests TENS has short-term efficacy in relieving symptoms of fibromyalgia while the stimulator is active. Future clinical trials should examine the effects of repeated daily delivery of TENS, similar to the way in which TENS is used clinically on pain, fatigue, function, and quality of life in individuals with fibromyalgia.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a non-pharmacological intervention used in the treatment of acute and chronic pain conditions. The first clinical studies on TENS were published over 50 years ago, when effective parameters of stimulation were unclear and clinical trial design was in its infancy. Over the last two decades, a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying TENS efficacy has led to the development of an adequate dose and has improved outcome measure utilization. The continued uncertainty about the clinical efficacy of TENS to alleviate pain, despite years of research, is related to the quality of the clinical trials included in systematic reviews. This summary of the evidence includes only trials with pain as the primary outcome. The outcomes will be rated as positive (+), negative (−), undecided (U), or equivalent to other effective interventions (=). In comparison with our 2014 review, there appears to be improvement in adverse events and parameter reporting. Importantly, stimulation intensity has been documented as critical to therapeutic success. Examinations of the outcomes beyond resting pain, analgesic tolerance, and identification of TENS responders remain less studied areas of research. This literature review supports the conclusion that TENS may have efficacy for a variety of acute and chronic pain conditions, although the magnitude of the effect remains uncertain due to the low quality of existing literature. In order to provide information to individuals with pain and to clinicians treating those with pain, we suggest that resources for research should target larger, high-quality clinical trials including an adequate TENS dose and adequate timing of the outcome and should monitor risks of bias. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses should focus only on areas with sufficiently strong clinical trials that will result in adequate sample size.

Background: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is commonly used for the management of pain; however, its effects on several pain and function measures are unclear.Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of high-frequency TENS (HF-TENS) and low-frequency TENS (LF-TENS) on several outcome measures (pain at rest, movement-evoked pain, and pain sensitivity) in people with knee osteoarthritis.Design: The study was a double-blind, randomized clinical trial.Setting: The setting was a tertiary care center.Participants: Seventy-five participants with knee osteoarthritis (29 men and 46 women; 31–94 years of age) were assessed.Intervention: Participants were randomly assigned to receive HF-TENS (100 Hz) (n=25), LF-TENS (4 Hz) (n=25), or placebo TENS (n=25) (pulse duration=100 microseconds; intensity=10% below motor threshold).Measurements: The following measures were assessed before and after a single TENS treatment: cutaneous mechanical pain threshold, pressure pain threshold (PPT), heat pain threshold, heat temporal summation, Timed “Up & Go” Test (TUG), and pain intensity at rest and during the TUG. A linear mixed-model analysis of variance was used to compare differences before and after TENS and among groups (HF-TENS, LF-TENS, and placebo TENS).Results: Compared with placebo TENS, HF-TENS and LF-TENS increased PPT at the knee; HF-TENS also increased PPT over the tibialis anterior muscle. There was no effect on the cutaneous mechanical pain threshold, heat pain threshold, or heat temporal summation. Pain at rest and during the TUG was significantly reduced by HF-TENS, LF-TENS, and placebo TENS.Limitations: This study tested only a single TENS treatment.Conclusions: Both HF-TENS and LF-TENS increased PPT in people with knee osteoarthritis; placebo TENS had no significant effect on PPT. Cutaneous pain measures were unaffected by TENS. Subjective pain ratings at rest and during movement were similarly reduced by active TENS and placebo TENS, suggesting a strong placebo component of the effect of TENS.