Low-Frequency Pulsed Current Versus Kilohertz-Frequency Alternating Current: A Scoping Literature Review

Publication date: Available online 14 December 2017
Source:Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Author(s): Marco Aurélio Vaz, Viviane Bortoluzzi Frasson
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of low-frequency pulsed current versus kilohertz-frequency alternating current in terms of evoked-force, discomfort level, current intensity, and muscle fatigability, to discuss the physiological mechanisms of each Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation type, and to determine if kilohertz-frequency alternating current is better than low-frequency pulsed current for clinical treatment.Data SourcesManuscripts were obtained from PUBMED, SCOPUS, CENTRAL, CINAHL and SPORTSDISCUS databases using the terms "Russian current" OR "Kilohertz current" OR "Alternating current" OR "Pulsed current" OR "Aussie current" AND torque OR discomfort OR fatigue OR "current intensity", and through citation tracking up to July 2017.Study SelectionTwo independent reviewers selected studies comparing the use of the two neuromuscular electrical stimulation currents. Studies describing maximal current intensity tolerated and the main effects of the two different current types on discomfort, muscle force and fatigability were independently reviewed.Data ExtractionData was systematized according to (1) the methodology, (2) electrical current characteristics, (3) the outcomes on discomfort level, evoked force, current intensity and muscle fatigability.Data SynthesisThe search revealed 15 manuscripts comparing the two current types. Kilohertz-frequency alternated current generated equal or less force, similar discomfort, similar current intensity for maximal tolerated neuromuscular electrical stimulation and more fatigue compared to low-frequency pulsed current. Similar submaximal levels of evoked force revealed higher discomfort and current intensity for kilohertz-frequency alternated current compared to low-frequency pulsed current.ConclusionsAvailable evidence does not support the idea that Kilohertz-frequency alternated current is better than low-frequency pulsed current for strength training and rehabilitation.



from Rehabilitation via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2o3WOZE
via IFTTT