Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Jun 19:27:24.
doi: 10.1186/s12998-019-0245-z. eCollection 2019.

Effect of active TENS versus de-tuned TENS on walking capacity in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial

Carlo Ammendolia  1   2 , Pierre Côté  1   3   4 , Y Raja Rampersaud  5 , Danielle Southerst  6 , Michael Schneider  7 , Aksa Ahmed  2 , Claire Bombardier  8   9 , Gillian Hawker  8   9 , Brian Budgell  10
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effect of active TENS versus de-tuned TENS on walking capacity in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial

Carlo Ammendolia et al. Chiropr Man Therap. .

Abstract

Background context: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) leads to diminished blood flow to the spinal nerves causing neurogenic claudication and impaired walking ability. Animal studies have demonstrated increased blood flow to the spinal nerves and spinal cord with superficial para-spinal electrical stimulation of the skin.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of active para-spinal transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) compared to de-tuned TENS applied while walking, on improving walking ability in LSS.

Study design: This was a two-arm double-blinded (participant and assessor) randomized controlled trial.

Patient sample: We recruited 104 participants 50 years of age or older with neurogenic claudication, imaging confirmed LSS and limited walking ability.

Outcome measures: The primary measure was walking distance measured by the self-paced walking test (SPWT) and the primary outcome was the difference in proportions among participants in both groups who achieved at least a 30% improvement in walking distance from baseline using relative risk with 95% confidence intervals.

Methods: The active TENS group (n = 49) received para-spinal TENS from L3-S1 at a frequency of 65-100 Hz modulated over 3-s intervals with a pulse width of 100-200 usec, and turned on 2 min before the start and maintained during the SPWT. The de-tuned TENS group (n = 51) received similarly applied TENS for 30 s followed by ramping down to zero stimulus and turned off before the start and during the SPWT.Study funded by The Arthritis Society ($365,000 CAN) and salary support for Carlo Ammendolia funded by the Canadian Chiropractic Research Foundation ($500,000 CAN over 5 years).

Results: From August 2014 to January 2016 a total of 640 potential participants were screened for eligibility; 106 were eligible and 104 were randomly allocated to active TENS or de-tuned TENS. Both groups showed significant improvement in walking distance but there was no significant difference between groups. The mean difference between active and de-tuned TENS groups was 46.9 m; 95% CI (- 118.4 to 212.1); P = 0.57. A total of 71% (35/49) of active TENS and 74% (38/51) of de-tuned TENS participants achieved at least 30% improvement in walking distance; relative risk (RR), 0.96; 95% CI, (0.7 to 1.2) P = 0.77.

Conclusions: Active TENS applied while walking is no better than de-tuned TENS for improving walking ability in patients with degenerative LSS and therefore should not be a recommended treatment in clinical practice.

Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02592642. Registration October 30, 2015.

Keywords: Intermittent claudication; Lumbar spinal stenosis; Non-operative treatment; Randomized controlled trial; Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS); Walking.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of enrolment and randomization
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Fanuele JC, Birkmeyer NJ, Abdu WA, Tosteson TD, Weinstein JN. The impact of spinal problems on the health status of patients: have we underestimated the effect? Spine. 2000;25(12):1509–1514. PubMed PMID: 10851099. Epub 2000/06/13. eng. - PubMed
    1. Takahashi K, Kagechika K, Takino T, Matsui T, Miyazaki T, Shima I. Changes in epidural pressure during walking in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. 1995;20(24):2746–2749. PubMed PMID: 8747254. Epub 1995/12/15. eng. - PubMed
    1. Taylor VM, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Kreuter W. Low back pain hospitalization. Recent United States trends and regional variations. Spine. 1994;19(11):1207–1212. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199405310-00002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Katz JN, Dalgas M, Stucki G, Katz NP, Bayley J, Fossel AH, et al. Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Diagnostic value of the history and physical examination. Arthritis Rheum 1995;38(9):1236–1241. PubMed PMID: 7575718. Epub 1995/09/01. eng. - PubMed
    1. Winter CC, Brandes M, Muller C, Schubert T, Ringling M, Hillmann A, et al. Walking ability during daily life in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or the hip and lumbar spinal stenosis: a cross sectional study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2010;11:233. PubMed PMID: 20939866. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2958990. Epub 2010/10/14. eng. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data

Grants and funding