Data collection study, Microcurrent Therapy Lynn A. Wallace, PT (1990)
94% of the 1531 patients experienced a reduction in pain during the first treatment.
No side effects or increase in symptoms were reported. The overall results were remarkably similar when comparing the first 200 / 400 and 800 cases to the final total of 1531 cases.
Pain reduction occurring after the patient left the clinic was not recorded as pain reduction during treatment.
Patients who discontinued their treatments after significant progress (i.e. pain decrease from 10 to 3) but, before reaching a pain free state, were recorded as failures.
Similarly, patients whose treatment was discontinued by their physician before reaching a pain free state were recorded as failures.
96% response in pain relief.
88% pain free within 10 treatments.
12 types of acute injuries tested, average pain free = 4 treatments.
Acute radiating cervical pain, average pain free = 3.5 treatments.
Acute lower back pain, average pain free = 4.5 treatments
The following list of criteria was followed:
Patients were asked to rate their pain on a subjective pain scale (0 to 10, with 10 being unbearable pain).
Decreases in pain that were achieved after patients left the clinic were not included.
Biphasic current was used almost exclusively (negative current was used on selected cases with referred spinal pain).
Electrode probes and pads were used.
Daily treatment was encouraged, therefore, the total treatments rendered represent approximately that many days of treatment.
Medication was not altered.
No other modalities (heat, ice, electricity, or mechanical traction) were used.
Instructions such as positioning and avoidance were presented during the first treatment.
Worker's Compensation Injuries Study (283 patients)
Control group on conventional therapy (hot, cold packs, massage) avg. # of treatments for back to work =20.7
Microcurrent only: avg. # of treatments for back to work =8.7
Microcurrent and conventional therapy: avg. # of treatments back to work =8.6
Result: 237 % accelerated healing response.
Research has shown that pulsed electronic stimulation at specific frequencies and very subtle intensity levels (less than 400ua) has the ability to increase the production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the main energy fuel essential for cellular regeneration and healing. Higher stimulation intensities such as those required to cause muscle contraction and temporary pain blocking with conventional TENS Units actually decrease ATP production.