Objectives: To examine the effect of external application in pain compared to traditional method.
Design: A double-blind placebo-controlled clinical investigation.
Setting: A public hospital.
Participants: 168 LBP subjects.
Interventions: Assignment: (1) external IFT, (2) placebo external IFT, (3) traditional IFT and (4) placebo traditional IFT. Groups 1 and 3 received 20 min of IFT at 100 Hz and groups 2 and 4 received sham IFT.
Main outcome measures: Before and after IFT session, pain severity (VAS), pressure threshold (PPT), pain distribution and ROM were assessed.
Results: IFT changed all outcomes similarly. VAS and ROM improved statistically, P < 0.03. A trend of better VAS reduced with active IFTs.
Conclusions: No therapeutic difference between the two methods. 相似文献