Skip to content

Effect of Transcutaneous Electrostimulation (TENS) on Pain and Physical Function in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis

Does Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) Affect Pain and Function in Patients With Osteoarthritis of the Knee? ETRELKA, a Randomised Controlled Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01875042
Acronym
ETRELKA
Enrollment
220
Registered
2013-06-11
Start date
2012-12-31
Completion date
2015-01-31
Last updated
2016-04-12

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Osteoarthritis, Knee

Brief summary

The proposed study is a multi-center, randomized, double blind (patient and assessor), sham controlled clinical trial using a parallel 2 group design recruiting 220 patients of at least 18 years of age. The investigators will include patients presenting with clinically and radiologically diagnosed knee OA according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology, who experienced knee pain lasting for at least six months, and were diagnosed with radiographic severity of ≥ 2 on the Kellgren-Lawrence grading system or had one or more of the following signs and symptoms in the knee; restricted range of motion, pain in motion, crepitations, morning stiffness. Patients will be randomly allocated to receive TENS or sham TENS for 3 weeks.

Detailed description

Background Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common arthritic condition, which is one of the leading causes of disability in adults. Currently, no treatment can stop or reverse the progressive joint degeneration caused by OA. Most clinical interventions aim to improve pain and physical function. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is widely used in the management of knee OA to relieve osteoarthritic pain and facilitate the performance of therapeutic activities in order to maintain or improve physical function. Although its use is widespread, the available evidence is of questionable quality. An adequately sized and well conducted randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating the effectiveness and safety of TENS as treatment modality for knee OA is warranted to assist clinicians and policy makers to make decisions that are based on high-quality evidence, ultimately optimizing delivery of health-care in knee OA. Objective To determine TENS safety and effectiveness on pain and physical function compared to sham TENS in patients with knee OA. Methods Multi-center, randomized, double blind (patient and assessor), sham controlled clinical trial using a parallel 2 group design. Patients will be randomly allocated to receive TENS or sham TENS for 3 weeks. Informed consent of eligible patients will be obtained prior to randomization. Patients will be assigned on a 1:1 basis to the TENS or sham TENS group. Randomization will be centralized using randomization software and an electronic randomization form, generated by the trial coordinating centre (CTU Bern). Patients will be randomized once demographic data and selection criteria are completed by the recruiting physician in an electronic form. Randomization will be stratified according to treatment centre, TENS naivety and clinical severity.

Interventions

DEVICETENS

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation

DEVICESham TENS

Sham Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation

Sponsors

Arco Foundation
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Insel Gruppe AG, University Hospital Bern
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Men and women of at least 18 years of age * Clinical or radiological diagnosis of knee OA according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology * Knee pain lasting for six months or longer * Radiographic evidence of at least one osteophyte at the tibiofemoral joint (Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥ 2) or one or more of the following signs and symptoms in the knee; restricted range of motion, pain in motion, crepitations, morning stiffness * Written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

* Patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis or other musculoskeletal diseases affecting lower extremities * Relevant effusion in the index knee * Known current or remittent cancer * Carry cardiac pacemaker or defibrillator in situ * Knee surgery in previous 6 months * Received treatment with arthrocentesis * Intra-articular injection of steroids in previous 3 months * Inability to understand instructions or to give informed consent

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
WOMAC pain subscaleEnd of treatment (at 3 weeks)

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Number of drop-outsEnd of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
WOMAC pain subscaleBaseline, third treatment session, 3-month follow-up
WOMAC global subscaleBaseline, end of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
WOMAC physical function subscaleBaseline, end of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
Overall pain measured on VASBaseline, end of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
Number of patients experiencing serious side effectsEnd of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
Aberdeen measure of participationBaseline, end of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
Mean analgesic intake per patientBaseline, end of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
Number of drop-outs because of adverse eventsEnd of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
Number of patients experiencing local adverse eventsEnd of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
Number of patients experiencing any side effectsEnd of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up
Hospital anxiety and depression scaleBaseline, end of treatment (at 3 weeks), 3-month follow-up

Countries

Switzerland

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026