Can Direct Current Electrotherapy Be Used for Patients With Orthopedic Implants?

Thaler, Evangeline; Toledo, Felippe; Korte, Holger

doi:10.1177/2151458516681141

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…People with prior metal implants should not receive electrical stimulation within the area of the implant due to concern for heating of the underlying implants; however, evidence for excluding these patients is lacking and a recent study demonstrated no adverse events in patients with underlying orthopedic instrumentation receiving electrical stimulation. 34 A theoretical risk also exists for people with unhealed or partially healed fractures, as they could have increased fracture displacement due to muscle contractions induced from the electrical stimulation. However, only one case report of electrical stimulation-induced fracture exists in the literature.…”

Section: Potential Contraindicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…People with automated implantable cardioverter defibrillators or pacemakers may be excluded from FES to ensure the electrical stimulation does not damage and interfere with the proper functioning of these devices. People with prior metal implants should not receive electrical stimulation within the area of the implant due to concern for heating of the underlying implants; however, evidence for excluding these patients is lacking and a recent study demonstrated no adverse events in patients with underlying orthopedic instrumentation receiving electrical stimulation 34. A theoretical risk also exists for people with unhealed or partially healed fractures, as they could have increased fracture displacement due to muscle contractions induced from the electrical stimulation.…”

Section: Potential Contraindicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Electrical Stimulation for Rehabilitation After Spinal Cord Injury

Siegel¹,

Lambrechts²,

Fisher³

et al. 2022

Contemporary Spine Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Potential Contraindicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Potential Contraindicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrical Stimulation for Rehabilitation After Spinal Cord Injury

Siegel¹,

Lambrechts²,

Fisher³

et al. 2022

Contemporary Spine Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The metabolic effects of these techniques are also due to increase of biological enzymatic reactions that can cause accelerated oxygen uptake and healing. [ 16 17 ]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative study into the effects of topical hot salt and hot sand on patients' perception of low back pain

Etemadifar

Dehghan

Jazayeri

et al. 2022

Journal of Education and Health Promotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) has been regarded as one of the musculoskeletal problems which is affecting more than three-quarters of individuals in their lifetime. Nowadays, various pharmacological and nonpharmacological therapies are employed for relieving and treating LBP. This study was conducted to compare the effects of topical hot salt and hot sand on patients' perception of LBP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this, quasi-experimental study patients with LBP referring to the orthopedic clinic of Shahrekord educational hospital were divided randomly into two interventions and one control group in 2020. All three groups were received naproxen cream and daily physiotherapy in the same manner, the interventional groups in addition either topical hot salt or topical hot sand. Data gathering tool for measuring patients' perception of LBP was the McGill Pain Short Form Questionnaire to be completed at the beginning, immediately at the end, and 2 months after the intervention. The data were analyzed using SPSS statistical software (version 21.0). RESULTS: Totally, 90 patients were randomized based on the table of random numbers (mean age 51.1 + 11.1), and finally, 87 patients completed the study. Patients' perception of LBP before the intervention was homogenous in hot salt, hot sand, and the control group The mean score of total pain experience before the intervention was 14.1 ± 11.3 for hot sand, 13.9 ± 10.7 for hot salt and 13.7 ± 10.1 for control group The mean scores of these three groups were not significant before the intervention (P > 0.05). The mean score of total pain experience immediately after the intervention was 6.7 ± 4.2 for hot sand, 5.2 ± 3.1 for hot salt and 13.9 ± 9.8 for control group. The mean scores of the hot sand group and the hot salt group were significantly decreased compared with control group (P > 0.05). The mean score of total pain experience two months after the intervention was 5.6 ± 3.27 for hot sand, 4.21 ± 2.14 for hot salt and 13.8 ± 10.4 for control group. Mean score of total pain experience in both intervention groups had significantly reduced two months after the intervention compared to control group (P ≤ 0.001); so that the effect of hot salt treatment on reducing total pain experience was larger than hot sand (P ≤ 0.001). The same trend was observed for VAS and Present pain intensity variables. CONCLUSIONS: The findings have revealed that the topical treatments with hot salt and hot sand could have a significant effect on the perception of LBP compared to those in the control group; whereas hot salt might be stronger effects than hot sand on reducing LBP.

show abstract