Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS): Its short-term and long-term effects on the masticatory muscles

2000 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver S. Eble ◽  
Irmtrud E. Jonas ◽  
Heinrich F. Kappert
Keyword(s):  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Masticatory Muscles ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Electrical Nerve Stimulation

scholarly journals The Effect of Muscle Fatigue Using Short Term Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation

2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 373-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ganbaatar Namuun ◽  
Yasuhiro Endo ◽  
Yota Abe ◽  
Rie Nakazawa ◽  
Masaaki Sakamoto
Keyword(s):  
Muscle Fatigue ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Electrical Nerve Stimulation

scholarly journals Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for the Long‐Term Treatment of Ocular Pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 871-877 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen Zayan ◽  
Shruti Aggarwal ◽  
Elizabeth Felix ◽  
Roy Levitt ◽  
Konstantinos Sarantopoulos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Term Treatment ◽  
Ocular Pain ◽  
Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Long Term Treatment

Short-term high-frequency transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation decreases human motor cortex excitability

2004 ◽  
Vol 355 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 85-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatsuya Mima ◽  
Tatsuhide Oga ◽  
John Rothwell ◽  
Takeshi Satow ◽  
Jun-ichi Yamamoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Motor Cortex ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Human Motor Cortex ◽  
Motor Cortex Excitability ◽  
Human Motor

Cortical vs. afferent stimulation as an adjunct to functional task practice training: a randomized, comparative pilot study in people with cervical spinal cord injury

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 771-782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce Gomes-Osman ◽  
Edelle C Field-Fote
Keyword(s):  
Direct Current ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Cohen’S D ◽  
Task Practice ◽  
Functional Task

Objective: To assess single-session effects of three different types of stimuli known to increase cortical excitability when combined with functional task practice. Design: Randomized cross-over trial. Participants: A total of 24 participants with chronic cervical spinal cord injury. Interventions: One 30-minute session of each, applied concurrently with functional task practice: transcranial direct current stimulation, vibration, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Measurements: Nine-hole Peg Test, pinch force, visuomotor tracking, and cortical excitability were collected at pretest, posttest and late posttest (30 minutes after). Early effects (posttest minus pretest) and short-term persistence (late posttest minus pretest) were assessed using a general linear mixed model. Magnitude of effect size was assessed using the Cohen’s d. Results: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation was associated with moderate, significant early effects and short-term persistence on Nine-hole Peg Test performance (1.8 ±1.8, p = 0.003, d = 0.59; 2.0 ±2.5, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.65, respectively). Transcranial direct current stimulation (1.8 ±2.5, p = 0.003, Cohen’s d = 0.52) was also associated with significant short-term persistence of moderate size on Nine-hole Peg Test performance (1.8 ±2.5, p = 0.003, Cohen’s d = 0.52) and visuomotor tracking performance ( p = 0.05, d = 0.51). Early effects on corticomotor excitability were significant for transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation ( p = 0.003), approached significance for transcranial direct current stimulation ( p = 0.07), and only vibration was associated with significant short-term persistence ( p = 0.006). Conclusions: Meaningful improvements in aspects of hand-related function that persisted at least 30 minutes after intervention were observed with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation, when combined with functional task practice.

scholarly journals What Makes Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation Work? Making Sense of the Mixed Results in the Clinical Literature

2013 ◽  
Vol 93 (10) ◽  
pp. 1397-1402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen A. Sluka ◽  
Jan M. Bjordal ◽  
Serge Marchand ◽  
Barbara A. Rakel
Keyword(s):  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Nonpharmacological Treatment ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
Clinical Literature ◽  
Comparison Groups

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a nonpharmacological treatment for control of pain. It has come under much scrutiny lately with the Center for Medicare Services rendering a recent decision stating that “TENS is not reasonable and necessary for the treatment of CLBP [chronic low back pain].” When reading and analyzing the existing literature for which systematic reviews show that TENS is inconclusive or ineffective, it is clear that a number of variables related to TENS application have not been considered. Although many of the trials were designed with the highest of standards, recent evidence suggests that factors related to TENS application need to be considered in an assessment of efficacy. These factors include dosing of TENS, negative interactions with long-term opioid use, the population and outcome assessed, timing of outcome measurement, and comparison groups. The purpose of this perspective is to highlight and interpret recent evidence to help improve the design of clinical trials and the efficacy of TENS in the clinical setting.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document