search
Back to results

TENS Effectiveness and Knee Osteoarthritis in Humans (TOPS)

Primary Purpose

Knee Osteoarthritis

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
International
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
High Frequency TENS
Low frequency TENS
Placebo TENS
Sponsored by
University of Iowa
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Knee Osteoarthritis focused on measuring Knee OA, TENS

Eligibility Criteria

30 Years - 95 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • diagnosis of medial compartment knee osteoarthritis
  • 18 and 60 years of age
  • being able to ambulate to the mail box and back
  • stable medication schedule over the last three weeks
  • pain rating > 3 on a 0-10 scale when verbally asked to rate knee pain in the weight bearing position
  • normal L1-S2 dermatomal screen and normal great toe and thumb proprioception.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Knee surgery in the last six months
  • Knee injection in the last four weeks
  • serious medical condition, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, hypertension
  • dementia or cognitive impairment
  • permanent lower extremity sensory
  • prior TENS use

Sites / Locations

  • University of Iowa
  • Department of Physical Therapy Federal university of Sergipe
  • Health and Rehabilitation Science Research Institute, University of Ulster , UK

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm 3

Arm 4

Arm Type

Experimental

Experimental

Experimental

No Intervention

Arm Label

High frrequency TENS

Low frequency TENS

Placebo TENS

Control

Arm Description

100 Hz TENS, 100 usec

4 Hz, 100 usec TENS

100 Hz, 100 usec, set at motor minus 10% then ramps to off in 45 sec, 40 minutes

Age matched controls, no intervention

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Pressure pain threshold
A handheld digital pressure algometer (Somedic AB, Farsta, Sweden), was used to assess PPT with the 1 cm2 circular probe. Pressure was applied at 40 kPa/s and patients were instructed to press the hand held response switch when the sensation first became painful. Familiarization with the proceedure was accomplished with testing on the non-dominant forearm of each subject. Following this familiarization procedure, PPTs were assessed at the knee and anterior tibialis muscle bilaterally. An average of the three trials at each test site was used for analysis.
Timed Up and Go test
The TUG is a standardized test where on command subjects arise from a chair with no arm rest, ambulate 9.8 feet as quickly and safely as possible, turn, ambulate back, turn and return to sitting in the chair. The walking distance was measured in advance and marked on the floor with tape marks well visualized by subjects. Subjects were timed in a standardized fashion from the moment the upper back left the chair until return to full sitting position with back in contact with the chair.
Pain Intensity measures
Subjects were asked to rate their pain intensity on a horizontal 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The anchors utilized were "no pain" and "worst imaginable pain". VAS measures were taken at rest, during the TUG, during the HTS, and cutaneous mechanical pain testing.
Thermal Pain threshold (HPT) and Temporal summation (HTS)
The TSA II NeuroSensory Analyzer was used to assess (HPT)and (HTS). For both measures, the 5 cm2 probe was placed and initial temperature was set at 37oC, and increased at 1 °C/s to a maximum of 52 oC. Subjects indicated when they first felt pain by using the remote patient switch which recorded the temperature . For temporal summation (HTS), a tonic heat stimulus of 45.5 oC was applied for 20 s. After building to the 45.5 oC in the first 5 s, subjects rated pain caused by this stimulus on a 10 cm visual analog scale every 5s for 15s.
Cutaneous Mechanical Pain testing
Cutaneous mechanical pain thresholds were assessed with a series of von Frey filaments (North Coast Medical, Gilroy, CA) applied in ascending order from 0.008 to 300 g (0.008, 0.02, 0.04, 0.07, 0.16, 0.4, 0.6, 1.0, 1.4, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 15, 26, 60, 100, 180, 300 g). In addition, the subjects rated their pain on a 100 mm VAS in response to application of a 6 g von Frey filament at the six sites bilaterally.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Full Information

First Posted
May 9, 2011
Last Updated
May 12, 2011
Sponsor
University of Iowa
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT01354054
Brief Title
TENS Effectiveness and Knee Osteoarthritis in Humans
Acronym
TOPS
Official Title
Effects of a Single Treatment of High or Low Frequency TENS on Pain, Hyperalgesia and Function in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
May 2011
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
November 2006 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
June 2009 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
June 2009 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Name of the Sponsor
University of Iowa

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
TENS is a non pharmacological intervention to control pain. Both high (>50 Hz) and low (<10 Hz) frequency TENS are used in the clinic and it is thought that each type works through different mechanisms (see for review Sluka and Walsh, 2003). Hyperalgesia, an increased response to a noxious stimuli, is one component of pain and occurs both at the site of injury, primary hyperalgesia, and outside the site of injury, secondary hyperalgesia. Recent studies in animals with arthritis of the knee show that low and high frequency TENS differentially modulate primary and secondary hyperalgesia. Therefore the investigators hypothesize that TENS will reduce hyperalgesia and pain with movement resulting in increased function.
Detailed Description
The following specific aims will address this hypothesis: Specific Aim 1 will compare the effect of high frequency TENS, low frequency TENS, and placebo TENS in patients with osteoarthritis on a variety of outcome measures: primary and secondary hyperalgesia, subjective pain scores, and function. Specific Aim 2 will determine the relationships among these multiple pain measures in people with osteoarthritis, and compare to age matched controls. Specific Aim 3 will determine the genetic variability as it relates to osteoarthritis pain and response to TENS treatment Specific Aim 4 will determine how body composition (BMI, fat mass, percent fat, lean mass, and bone mass) impacts the effectiveness of TENS One of the long-term goals of the investigators is to determine the clinical effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments for pain, like TENS. These studies will begin to address this issue by examining effects of TENS on a variety of outcome measures in patients with a specific controlled condition (i.e., knee osteoarthritis). This research is innovative because it will be the first to systematically examine the effects of TENS on a variety of physiological parameters (primary and secondary hyperalgesia) and clinical outcome measures (resting pain, movement-evoked pain, function) in a common, painful and limiting condition that is frequently seen in physical therapy clinics. These studies will further allow us to translate basic science experiments previously performed in animal models of arthritis to the clinic. This information is expected to assist the clinician in the treatment choice for a particular patient and guide future clinical research.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Knee Osteoarthritis
Keywords
Knee OA, TENS

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
ParticipantInvestigatorOutcomes Assessor
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
100 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
High frrequency TENS
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
100 Hz TENS, 100 usec
Arm Title
Low frequency TENS
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
4 Hz, 100 usec TENS
Arm Title
Placebo TENS
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
100 Hz, 100 usec, set at motor minus 10% then ramps to off in 45 sec, 40 minutes
Arm Title
Control
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
Age matched controls, no intervention
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
High Frequency TENS
Other Intervention Name(s)
Electrical stimulation
Intervention Description
100 usec, 100 Hz, pulse amplitude motor - 10%, 30-40 minutes
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Low frequency TENS
Other Intervention Name(s)
Electrical stimulation
Intervention Description
100 usec, 4 Hz, pulse amplitude motor - 10%, 30-40 minutes
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Placebo TENS
Other Intervention Name(s)
Placebo electrical stimulation
Intervention Description
100 usec, 100 Hz, motor - 10%, pulse amplitude adjusted and maintained for 30 seconds then ramping down to zero in 15 seconds
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Pressure pain threshold
Description
A handheld digital pressure algometer (Somedic AB, Farsta, Sweden), was used to assess PPT with the 1 cm2 circular probe. Pressure was applied at 40 kPa/s and patients were instructed to press the hand held response switch when the sensation first became painful. Familiarization with the proceedure was accomplished with testing on the non-dominant forearm of each subject. Following this familiarization procedure, PPTs were assessed at the knee and anterior tibialis muscle bilaterally. An average of the three trials at each test site was used for analysis.
Time Frame
3 hours
Title
Timed Up and Go test
Description
The TUG is a standardized test where on command subjects arise from a chair with no arm rest, ambulate 9.8 feet as quickly and safely as possible, turn, ambulate back, turn and return to sitting in the chair. The walking distance was measured in advance and marked on the floor with tape marks well visualized by subjects. Subjects were timed in a standardized fashion from the moment the upper back left the chair until return to full sitting position with back in contact with the chair.
Time Frame
3 hours
Title
Pain Intensity measures
Description
Subjects were asked to rate their pain intensity on a horizontal 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The anchors utilized were "no pain" and "worst imaginable pain". VAS measures were taken at rest, during the TUG, during the HTS, and cutaneous mechanical pain testing.
Time Frame
3 hours
Title
Thermal Pain threshold (HPT) and Temporal summation (HTS)
Description
The TSA II NeuroSensory Analyzer was used to assess (HPT)and (HTS). For both measures, the 5 cm2 probe was placed and initial temperature was set at 37oC, and increased at 1 °C/s to a maximum of 52 oC. Subjects indicated when they first felt pain by using the remote patient switch which recorded the temperature . For temporal summation (HTS), a tonic heat stimulus of 45.5 oC was applied for 20 s. After building to the 45.5 oC in the first 5 s, subjects rated pain caused by this stimulus on a 10 cm visual analog scale every 5s for 15s.
Time Frame
3 hours
Title
Cutaneous Mechanical Pain testing
Description
Cutaneous mechanical pain thresholds were assessed with a series of von Frey filaments (North Coast Medical, Gilroy, CA) applied in ascending order from 0.008 to 300 g (0.008, 0.02, 0.04, 0.07, 0.16, 0.4, 0.6, 1.0, 1.4, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 15, 26, 60, 100, 180, 300 g). In addition, the subjects rated their pain on a 100 mm VAS in response to application of a 6 g von Frey filament at the six sites bilaterally.
Time Frame
3 hours

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
30 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
95 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: diagnosis of medial compartment knee osteoarthritis 18 and 60 years of age being able to ambulate to the mail box and back stable medication schedule over the last three weeks pain rating > 3 on a 0-10 scale when verbally asked to rate knee pain in the weight bearing position normal L1-S2 dermatomal screen and normal great toe and thumb proprioception. Exclusion Criteria: Knee surgery in the last six months Knee injection in the last four weeks serious medical condition, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, hypertension dementia or cognitive impairment permanent lower extremity sensory prior TENS use
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Barbarb A Rakel, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
University of Iowa College of Nursing
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Kathleen A Sluka, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
University of Iowa Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science Graduate Program
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
University of Iowa
City
Iowa City
State/Province
Iowa
ZIP/Postal Code
52242
Country
United States
Facility Name
Department of Physical Therapy Federal university of Sergipe
City
Aracaju
Country
Brazil
Facility Name
Health and Rehabilitation Science Research Institute, University of Ulster , UK
City
Newtownabbey
State/Province
Northern Ireland
Country
United Kingdom

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Citations:
PubMed Identifier
14622708
Citation
Sluka KA, Walsh D. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation: basic science mechanisms and clinical effectiveness. J Pain. 2003 Apr;4(3):109-21. doi: 10.1054/jpai.2003.434.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22466027
Citation
Vance CG, Rakel BA, Blodgett NP, DeSantana JM, Amendola A, Zimmerman MB, Walsh DM, Sluka KA. Effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on pain, pain sensitivity, and function in people with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial. Phys Ther. 2012 Jul;92(7):898-910. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20110183. Epub 2012 Mar 30.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

TENS Effectiveness and Knee Osteoarthritis in Humans

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs