Myalgia
Conditions
Interventions
TENS was applied using Empi® apparatus (St. Paul, MN, USA) and, after adequate cleaning of the skin with 70% alcohol, four electrodes silicone adhesive (ValuTrode®, Mundelein, IL,USA) with dimensions
Device
E02.331.800
Sponsors
Universidade Federal de Sergipe
Universidade Federal de Sergipe
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Healthy; physically inactive volunteers; both sexes; aged 18 to 40 years.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Previous experience with the use of TENS; muscoloskeletal disorders; heart diseases
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Outcome 1: Improvement of pain intensity felt ate rest and during movement, at the following times: before, during the DOMS protocol immediately after and 24 hours later. Zero is considered as “no pain” and 10 as “worst pain imaginable”. The motion pain in late reevaluation (after 24h) will be made during the execution of muscle power and physical tolerance test. ;Outcome found 1: There was no difference between groups in the intensity of pain at rest and in movement. There was an increase in pain intensity at rest in the immediate reassessment in the group treated with active TENS (p <0.001, 95% CI: 1.55 to 3.87) and in the placebo TENS group (p <0.001, 95% CI: 1, 18 to 3.24), with a 24 h decrease after muscle pain induction (p <0.05), with no return to baseline. ;Outcome 2: Improvement of pressure pain threshold (PPT) evaluated through a digital pressure algometry (Impac®, Paulinia, SP, Brazil), with an area of 1 cm2. Pressure will be held in kg/ cm2 in the muscle belly of the pectoralis major muscle (intersection of a horizontal line from the middle third of the clavicle with a vertical line drawn from the middle third of the sternum) and the latissimus dorsi muscle (intersection of a horizontal line from the inferior angle of the scapula with a vertical line drawn from the T12 vertebra) of the dominant upper limb (primary hyperalgesia) and in the anterior surface of the forearm (secondary hyperalgesia).Three measures will be made at each preset location and averaging them considered. This procedure was repeated in the evaluation, in the reassessment of the DMT protocol and in the reassessment of 24 hours after. ;Outcome found 2:In the intra-group analysis, there was a reduction in the pressure pain threshold in the pectoralis major (p = 0.01, 95% CI: 3.31 to 4.61) and large dorsal muscles (p = 0 , 02; 95% CI: 5.36 to 7.58) in the TENS group active in both immediate reevaluation and reevaluation after 24h. As for the flexor muscles of the forearm (p = 0.01: 95% | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 5: The success of the late muscle pain induction protocol (DMT) was defined as an increase of two or more points in the 11-point Numerical Scale between baseline pain and post-pain pain induction protocol.;Outcome found 5: There was an increase in pain intensity at rest in the immediate reassessment in the group treated with active TENS (p <0.001, 95% CI: 1.55 to 3.87) and in the placebo TENS group (p <0.001, 95% CI: 1, 18 to 3.24), with a 24 h decrease after muscle pain induction (p <0.05), with no return to baseline.;Expected outcome 6: Improvement of muscle power. The measurement will be performed with a linear encoder (MuscleLab™ 4010, Ergotest Innovation, Langensund, Norway) coupled to the training station via a linear wire to ground. This procedure was repeated in the evaluation, in the reassessment of the DMT protocol and in the reassessment of 24 hours after. ;Outcome found 6: The muscle power in the active TENS group in the row exercise presented a reduction in immediate reassessment in relation to baseline (p = 0.01, 95% CI: 207.01 to 287.11) and increased 24 h after immediate reassessment (p = 0.03, 95% CI: 215.98 to 295.81), but still lower than the baseline (p = 0.01, 95% CI: 229.59 to 319.83). In the TENS placebo group, there was also a reduction in the MP of the evaluation for immediate reassessment (p = 0.001; 95% CI: 198.41 to 282.85), but there was no difference between the values ??of the immediate and 24-hour reassessment. There was no statistically significant difference between groups. In the supine exercise, there was a reduction in PM of the active TENS group from the evaluation for immediate reevaluation (p = 0.002, 95% CI: 111.41 to 175.92) and also from the immediate reevaluation for the 24-h reevaluation (p = 0.003 ; 95% CI: 98.95 to 159.04). In the TENS placebo group, there was no significant difference in BP between the evaluation moments in the supine exercise. Despite this, no statistically significant difference | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactThaís Pereira
Universidade Federal de Sergipe
Outcome results
None listed